There is a subjective issue.
Democracy means many things to many people….but for this post I will focus on returning the country into the hands of the voter and take the reins of government out of the hands of those high dollar donors.
This is about that infamous ruling by the Roberts court, Citizen United.
To end an era in which wealthy corporations have been given free rein to spend nearly unlimited money on political campaigns, Democrats in the U.S. House on Thursday proposed a constitutional amendment that would overturn the hugely consequential Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision by U.S. Supreme Court, saying the ruling “has dangerously eroded” the government’s ability to serve the public interest.
Reps. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), Dean Phillips (D-Minn.), and Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) led dozens of co-sponsors in introducing the Democracy for All Amendment two days before the 13th anniversary of the Citizens United decision, in which the court struck down a ban on corporate independent expenditures.
According to Schiff, the constitutional amendment—which the congressman first proposed in 2013—would:
- Make clear the Constitution does not restrict the ability of Congress or the states to propose reasonable, viewpoint-neutral limitations on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections;
- Distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities, including by prohibiting the latter from spending unlimited amounts of money to influence elections;
- Allow states to enact public campaign financing systems, which can restrict the influence of corporate or private wealth; and
- Take further steps to protect the freedom of the press in the case of future campaign finance-related legislation.
“It would affirm the right of the people to pass state and federal laws by restoring Congress’ and the states’ authority to place [limits] on political spending,” said the group.
In addition to overturning Citizens United, the Democrats aim to overturn the “fundamental flaws” and legal precedents that underpinned the court’s reasoning in 2010 and in “an entire line of cases dating back to the 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision, which prevented meaningful regulation of campaign expenditures by corporations and special interest groups.”
A fine idea that I support. But I also know that this will go nowhere since the GOP controls the House and they are deep in the pockets of the abusers of campaign finance policies.
I would tell you to contact your representative but that would be counter-productive…..for no one in DC is listening to what you think or want.
This is a fine idea.
I Read, I Write, You Know
“lego ergo scribo”