news-record.com

RALEIGH — More money from corporations, labor unions and other groups will flow into state and local campaigns as the result of a ruling the U.S. Supreme Court handed down Thursday.

The 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission struck down decades-old prohibitions keeping organizations from buying ads or otherwise advocating on behalf of or against candidates.

Because the justices based their decision on free-speech rights protected by the First Amendment , the ruling applies to state laws as well as federal restrictions.

“We think if a corporation made an independent expenditure and we tried to stop it, we’d be in court,” said Gary Bartlett , executive director of the State Board of Elections.

The court left intact state and federal reporting requirements, so corporations will have to disclose the amount they spend and how they spend it.

But good-government campaigners were livid Thursday, saying the decision makes government more vulnerable to corporate influence than it already is.

“You’re talking about corporations having the potential to spend a lot more money than we’ve seen deployed in the past,” said Bob Phillips, who leads Common Cause’s North Carolina chapter.

North Carolina was one of 26 states that filed a brief in the case hoping to defend laws that restrict corporate donors.

On the other side, business groups say the ruling is a victory for free-speech rights.

“The most important thing is it indicates that the court ... thinks the First Amendment means something,” said Dallas Woodhouse , who leads the North Carolina chapter of Americans for Prosperity, which has been a vocal opponent of the health reform bill.

Woodhouse said his group may not be affected by portions of the ruling that allow spending on a particular election, but his group could find it easier to operate because of other restrictions that were struck down having to do with the frequency and timing of politically-tinged ads.

Many analysts said corporations would be wary of flexing their muscle in this arena for fear of aggravating customers or shareholders. But more money could flow to groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which was involved in the Citizens United case.

Political watchers said they expect more money to flow into North Carolina this year, particularly in connection with the U.S. Senate campaign.

“The biggest factor in the 2008 Senate campaign was the $11 million-plus the DSCC (Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee) spent on behalf of (Greensboro Democrat) Kay Hagan,” said political strategist Gary Pearce. “Now, you’ve got the possibility of corporations spending that much money directly to affect a race.”

A spokeswoman for the N.C. chamber said her group is unsure how the decision will apply here or whether the group will change its approach to elections.

“We believe that whatever the rules are, they should apply equally to everyone — the ultimate goal should be a level playing field,” Sherry Melton said.

The court ruling prohibits companies from “coordinating” their spending with a particular candidate or party, Bartlett said. Whether that bars direct conversations about messages or back-door communications through a common media firm is unclear and is most likely a question the legislature will have to answer, he said.

“It will probably be a while before we’re able to understand this full,” Bartlett said.

Contact Mark Binker at (919) 832-5549 or mark.binker@news-record.com