Even the Supreme Court is isn't all that decisive when it comes to the issue of campaign finance and business in America.
While the 5-4 decision in Citizens United vs. The Federal Election Commission on Jan. 21, 2010 established an unprecedented freedom for businesses, corporations and unions to financially support their candidate of choice, it was an extremely contentious issue at the time and it remains one today, with members of government and special interest groups constantly trying to revise or legislate a new rule of law.
According to Wikipedia, the ruling "was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court holding that the First Amendment prohibits government from placing limits on independent spending for political purposes by corporations and unions. The 5–4 decision originated in a dispute over whether the non-profit corporation Citizens United could air a film critical of Hillary Clinton, and whether the group could advertise the film in broadcast ads featuring Clinton's image, in apparent violation of the 2002 Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly known as the McCain–Feingold Act in reference to its primary Senate sponsors."
There are currently several groups (some of them nonprofits established by corporations themselves) and politicians trying to change the current law, including 3rd District Congressman James McGovern who represent much of MetroWest.
What do you think about the issue? Do businesses, corporations and unions deserve the rights afforded to individuals, or not? Or, is the issue too complicated to give a simple yes or no? Give you thoughts in the comment field.