Citizen's did not rule on disclosure requirements. Anonymous donations are allowed by federal law to the 501(c)(4) organizations and that law can be changed.
Yeah, political payback. Whether disclosure is good or bad is debatable but your argument for it is without a doubt, bad. Do you think the gay clients should be able to follow the hotel owner into the voting booth or be able to see his vote? Do you not know what sort of abuses use to happen in our election system when that was allowed? What happens when the hotel owner fires his bellhop because he donated to a group supporting gay marriage?And it wasn't about rewards for backers, it was about retaliation on the donors for the donation. A hotel owner in SF who had a large gay clientelle made a large contribution to the anti gay marriage campaign in CA and the gay community found out and boycotted the hotel.
Which I think is perfectly fair. If you're donating large amounts to campaigns I vehemently oppose, I should be able to know this so I can deny you my business. Seems pretty free market to me.
Should the state have been able to force disclosure of the authors of The Federalist papers or the Cato letters?