In the News: Wall Street Journal: Another Union Attack on Corporate Speech

By CCP Chairman Bradley A. Smith: Since the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, holding that corporations and unions have a right to make expenditures in political races, the political left has been frantically trying to find some way to silence corporate voices. The latest ploy is an effort to […]

Filed Under: Corporate Governance, Corporate Governance Press Release/In the News/Blog, External Relations Sub-Pages, In the News, Published Articles, WSJ

Can’t the Post Afford Fact Checkers?

Campaign finance and the First Amendment excite strong emotions, but that’s no excuse for making up facts to support your argument. Yet Katrina vanden Heuvel had a recent online piece in The Washington Post that baldly misstated simple facts – facts that should already have been known by any competent commentator.

As part of her screed against Citizens United, she writes that “Chief Justice John Roberts and his band of right-wing brothers held that corporations had the same right as individuals to contribute directly to political campaigns and to participate in direct advocacy on their behalf.”

That is simply untrue.


Filed Under: Blog

In the News: Campaigns & Elections: Welcome to the PAC jungle

Welcome to the PAC jungle By Allen Dickerson A federal court decision in the District of Columbia recently spawned another political entity to add to the growing field of political action committees, 527s and Super PACs. These new dual-purpose PACs are the latest creatures to enter the crowded, mutating environment created by the recent spate […]

Filed Under: Carey v. FEC Other Links, Completed Case, In the News, In the News Our Cases, Litigation Blog/Press Releases, Published Articles

You Speak Good

Every now and then, the pro-regulation reform community holds a press conference to vent their frustrations about campaign finance issues.  Last week’s conference, which took place on the heels of the first congressional FEC oversight hearing in seven years, was supposed to draw attention to President Obama’s inaction regarding the FEC.  

The various pro-regulation reform groups released a letter addressing President Obama.  We decided to supply a humorous  “translation” of sorts addressing their key complaints.

Disclaimer: this is satirical, not to be taken literally, and meant in good fun.


Filed Under: Blog

Citizens United: Myths and Reality

So much information is put out about the Supreme Court’s 2010 decisio in Citizens United v. FEC, it is, quite frankly, beyond are ability to keep up. It’s like attacking a hoard of mosquitos with a fly swatter.

Here’s just one, I noticed today.

Filed Under: Blog

FEC Commissioners Testify before Congressional Subcommittee on Elections

“Luckily, I hired a great lawyer.”

Although the November 3rd House Subcommittee on Elections hearing, entitled Federal Election Commission: Reviewing Policies, Processes and Procedures, touched on a multitude of topics, this utterance by a Congressman underscored the pervasive concern among the committee members that the FEC has not provided full guidance to the public on the Commission’s enforcement policies and penalty schedules.  The hearing took place at 10am at the Longworth House Office Building.

In his opening statement, Chairman Harper pointedly expressed his frustration with the current system: “How much will candidates spend to figure out what they can and cannot do?”



Filed Under: Blog

Brad Smith Comments are Pearls of Wisdom


This is the first in a series of posts on corporations adapted from CCP Founder Brad Smith’s comments on an article that appeared in The Frum Forum on Tuesday, October 27th. Some of the information provided by Brad in the comments section was so informative, we made the decision to appropriate the text and repurpose it as a series of blog posts. The following is a very clear explanation of corporate personhood and why CCP supports the general idea. 

Is a corporation a person? Of course not. But what is it, then? Trees? Ducks? A building with a corporate name on the front? A bank account? Of course not. If a corporation is just an “artificial being,” how could it spend money to spend on politics, or pollute, or operate ships, or make a profit, pay taxes, or drill for oil? It must be something more.

A corporation is an association of people (or in some cases just one person) joining together to achieve mutual ends. The corporation deals with persons – customers – on the basis of limited liability. That is to say, customers may sue the corporation, but may only recover the assets put at risk (invested in the enterprise) by the owners. For legal purposes, we call it a “person,” though what we really mean is a group of people with fluctuating membership.


Filed Under: Blog

The Center for Competitive Politics is now the Institute for Free Speech.