September 29, 2010
In an op-ed for Project Syndicate, Harvard Law School Professor Lucian Bebchuk raises questions about the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which grants corporations greater leeway in political spending. Bebchuk argues that lawmakers need to consider amending legislation to allow for more transparency regarding corporations' “political-speech decisions,” and he proposes adding rules to safeguard against the divergence of those decisions from the interests of their shareholders.
Bebchuk, who is a regular contributor to the online op-ed commentary compendium, is the director of the Program on Corporate Governance at Harvard Law School.
by Lucian Bebchuk
A recent decision issued by the United States Supreme Court expanded the freedom of corporations to spend money on political campaigns and candidates – a freedom enjoyed by corporations in other countries around the world. This raises well-known questions about democracy and private power, but another important question is often overlooked: who should decidBebe for a publicly traded corporation whether to spend funds on politics, how much, and to what ends?