Prompt disclosure of expenditures

Radiolab continues its More Perfect series on stories about the Supremes. Perhaps the most important and most consequential case out of that court in the last decade was Citizens United, which dealt with campaign finance. This program takes an hour to explain the background and effects of the case. A couple things from the program:

* When the case was heard in 2009 Justice David Souter wrote a stinging dissent explaining why Citizens United’s position of unregulated campaign finance should be rejected. On the last day of the court’s term in June that year everyone was expecting to hear the ruling on this case. Instead, two things happened: Souter retired (which had been announced earlier), and, something that rarely happens, the remaining justices announced the Citizens United case would be reheard in the fall. Because Souter’s dissent isn’t in the actual ruling we won’t know what he wrote until he decides to release his papers or maybe not until 50 years after his death (he is still alive).

* Justice Anthony Kennedy sided with conservatives to say there should be no limit to campaign spending by corporations because money is necessary to disseminate free speech. The imbalance between a huge pot of money on one side and very little on the other side isn’t a problem because there should be full disclosure of the source of the money. From the ruling (as condensed by Wikipedia):

... prompt disclosure of expenditures can provide shareholders and citizens with the information needed to hold corporations and elected officials accountable for their positions and supporters. Shareholders can determine whether their corporation’s political speech advances the corporation’s interest in making profits, and citizens can see whether elected officials are "in the pocket" of so-called moneyed interests... This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.

Except that didn’t happen. Those disclosure laws were either gutted on never enacted.