On the recordJuly 16, 2012
To the Senator's point about the distinction between a corporate forum and an individual justice, John Paul Stevens addressed this in his dissent. He said: In the context of elections to public office, the distinction between corporate and human speakers is significant. Although they make enormous contributions to our society, corporations are not actually members of it. They cannot vote or run for office because they may be managed or controlled by nonresidents. Their interests may conflict in fundamental respects with the interests of eligible voters. The financial research, legal structure, and instrumental orientation of corporations raise legitimate concerns about their role in the electoral process. Our lawmakers have a compelling constitutional basis, if not also a democratic duty, to take measures designed to guard against potentially deleterious effects of corporate spending in local and national races. So here is the esteemed Justice saying not only--not only is there a compelling constitutional basis but probably a democratic duty. And what is he talking about? He is talking about ``We the People,'' the first three words of our Constitution--the vision that we have a democracy, that we have a representative form of government, we have a republic, and that it is centered around, as President Lincoln so aptly described, ``a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.'' We have a duty to protect that. Montana had a duty to protect that 100 years ago.…





