Ayotte Supports Supreme Court Decision That Would Allow Foreign Corporations Free Reign Over NH Elections
CONCORD - With voters, experts and editorial boards across the state increasingly concerned about the Supreme Court's decision last month to allow corporations to meddle in Granite State elections and silence the will of New Hampshire voters, Republican Senate candidate Kelly Ayotte has put herself squarely in defense of corporations.
Ayotte immediately came out in favor of the decision, which would allow massive foreign companies to pour an unlimited amount of cash and influence into New Hampshire elections [Nashua Telegraph, 1/24/10].
This morning, the Concord Monitor wrote: "Could, for example, a largely state-owned company in Russia or Hugo Chavez's Venezuela set up a U.S. subsidiary to contribute to elections? Some experts say the answer is yes. Limiting that influence should be the subject of immediate congressional debate [Concord Monitor, 2/1/10]." Ayotte's hometown newspaper cited the dissenting opinion last week, that the decision "threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation" [Nashua Telegraph, 1/26/10].
"You are either on the side of New Hampshire voters, or the side of multi-national, multibillion-dollar corporations that want to infect our state's political process with their grossly-funded special interests," said Emily Browne, Press Secretary for the New Hampshire Democratic Party. "Kelly Ayotte, once again, has put herself squarely on the side of big corporations. She'll cede control of your health coverage to big insurance companies, then let Wall Street govern Main Street- and finally she'll tell you she'd rather listen to big banks and corporate interests than middle-class New Hampshire families."
Democratic Senate candidate Paul Hodes came out against the Supreme Court decision and today announced he is working on a constitutional amendment to block corporations from using unlimited cash to influence New Hampshire elections [AP, 2/1/10].