Public Agrees With Court: Campaign Money Is "Free Speech" (Gallup Poll)

Gallup ^ | 01/22/10 | Lydia Saad

[coaltrain]

Americans' broad views about corporate spending in elections generally accord with the Supreme Court's decision Thursday that abolished some decades-old restrictions on corporate political activity. Fifty-seven percent of Americans consider campaign donations to be a protected form of free speech, and 55% say corporate and union donations should be treated the same way under the law as donations from individuals are. At the same time, the majority think it is more important to limit campaign donations than to protect this free-speech right.

The free-speech question elicits uncommon agreement across party lines. More than 6 in 10 Republicans and Democrats believe campaign donations are a protected form of free speech, but fewer than half of independents (48%) agree.

[coaltrain]

Uh oh, how are obama and the Dems going to fight this ruling now that a solid majority of the people agreed with the decision? Won't this go against their new phony populist theme? Should the Dems ignore the Judicial Branch as well?

[Tzimisce]

So?

When has this Congress ever cared what people think?

[JohnLongIsland]

Once again, Obama’s utter contempt and distain for the constitution is exposed.

[fireman15]

When you limit campaign contributions... only the criminals figure out ways to get hundreds of millions of dollars from foreign sources... and then whitewash the money by claiming it came from multiple small transactions from Mickey Mouse and other ficticious characters.

[nikos1121]

Let me see if I understand this. It’s still illegal for corporations to donate money directly to federal election candidates...but they can run ads to support candidates?

If this is what the supreme court decision says, then I say, “What is the big deal here?” I mean why shouldn’t they?

It’s another example of how the left loves to restrict and control our freedom of free speech.

[ez]

If you’re not smart enough to watch campaign commercials and take them for what they are, maybe you should think twice about voting.

[Tax Government]

This law was a direct assault on freedom to associate, as it interfered with associations speaking publicly.

[Lorianne]

The other part of it is left out.

If the Federal bureaucracy were smaller in size and scope than it is now (and as it should be by the Constitution), all this campaign money no matter the source would have fewer legislation to sway, fewer people to bribe.