The Myth of Corporate Speech
April 18, 2010
When Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (holding that corporations have the right to make campaign contributions) was announced, libertarians went "Wheeeeeeeeee! Corporations have free speech rights, too!" As with with most sentiments underlying modern-day libertarianism, the rejoicing was childish. The latest Goldman Sachs fraud case demonstrates why.
John Paulson & Company paid Goldman Sachs $15 million to fool some investor's to take a sucker's bet. Paulson created a pile of subprime mortgages that were guaranteed to default. He then told Goldman, "Tell your clients that I am going to invest in these securities, and need additional investors." Instead of investing in the securities, Paulson shorted them.
Now, back to Citizens United:
In 2005, 2007 and 2008, John Paulson & Company spent between $30,000 and $90,000 each year on federal lobbying. (Details here.)
Furthermore, along with his wife, Jenny, Paulson has contributed more than $213,000 to federal candidates, parties and committees during the past decade, according to a Center for Responsive Politics review of campaign finance reports filed with the Federal Election Commission.
Of that amount, about 60 percent has gone to Republicans and about 40 percent has gone to Democrats.
When regular people - that's libertarians - make a campaign contribution, it means something. It's a show of support to a candidate. It is a way of expressing speech: "I believe in this cause."
When people like John Paulson and his corporation give money to candidates, speech has nothing to do with it. It's all about buying access. Thus, Paulson donates money to Democrats and Republicans alike. Indeed, most monied interests and large corporations donate to both parties. To a large corporation, it doesn't matter which candidate wins: It only matters that the corporation wins.