Chris Dodd Seeks Constitutional Amendment To Reverse Supreme Court Campaign Finance Ruling

Sen. Chris Dodd (D-Conn.) announced on Thursday that he will introduce a constitutional amendment to reverse the Supreme Court's recent campaign finance ruling.

According to a statement issued by Dodd's office, the senator's amendment would "authorize Congress to regulate the raising and spending of money for state and federal political campaigns, and to implement and enforce the amendment through appropriate legislation."

"In the wake of one of the most radical decisions in the Supreme Court's history of campaign finance jurisprudence, a constitutional amendment is necessary to fully restore the trust and voice of the American people," Dodd said in a statement. "If corporations -- foreign as well as domestic -- are allowed even greater and more direct influence over our elections, our democracy as we know it will cease to exist. I won't stand for that. I urge my colleagues, and the American people, to join me in defense of democracy by supporting this amendment and other interim steps to mitigate the damage done by this decision."

Dodd is not the first Democrat who has sought to upend the ruling, which would allow a flood of corporate money into politics. Earlier this week, Rep. John Conyers (D-Mich.) and Rep. Donna F. Edwards (D-Md.) introduced their own amendment.

Sen. Arlen Specter (D-Penn.) also suggested introducing an amendment, and Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) expressed his support for changing the constitution.

"I think we need a constitutional amendment to make it clear once and for all that corporations do not have the same free speech rights as individuals," Kerry said at a Senate hearing on Tuesday.

Comments

[tompoe]

10:45 AM on 02/06/2010

Dodd needs to focus on his bank regulatory duties, and stop trying to salvage his damaged idiotic career in the Senate. Taking Single Payer off the table, selling out to Wall Street, and now he wants to take credit for a constitutional amendment? His legacy is shot, and his interest in politics as serving the people of his district is much too little, much too late. He and McCain are one and the same me-first-country-second jerks.

[Tresco]

03:43 PM on 02/05/2010

This man needs to shut up and go away already.

[thetruthmustbetold]

03:35 PM on 02/05/2010

This is the president who took $60 million from SEIU members and was visited by its head, Andy Stern, more than any other person last year. Obama’s “outrage” deserves a closer look.

[dhfsfc]

03:28 PM on 02/05/2010

Great! Dodd wants the people who benefit from corporate donations to write the rules on donations!

How many loop-holes do you and the corporations plan to have our legislators put into that bill?

Just make the constitutional amendment say Corporations Are Not People! There, that ought to fix it!

[binksmom85]

04:19 PM on 02/10/2010

amending the Constitution to eliminate corporate control of campaigns does not go nearly far enough. We need to end the 'personhood' of these entities. They are artificial beings, immortal; the most vile human can be imprisoned until they die, corporate misdeeds and influence are guaranteed to continue uninterrupted to an unforeseeable future date. An individual has no power against the composite wealth and immortality of a corporation; sue one and you will die before their army of lawyers will allow you a day in court. How many American jobs have executives shifted overseas to exploited workers who make pennies, so they can create profits that they then take for themselves? The vast majority of outstanding shares in existence were purchased with public tax monies to underwrite large State retirement systems, or other public responsibilities. But the public is regularly fleeced of their rightful profits because the average 'Top 5' cadre of officers takes 25% of net profits for their own remuneration. Just saw a bailed out bank take 62% of profits for bonuses. Efforts by stockholders to exercise control over the conduct of business, and these thefts of profits, regularly fails. We have to live with a 'war' on terror to support the military-industrial corporations, instead of an international police effort which has been successful with other terrorist groups. Halliburton stock went through the ceiling when SCOTUS decided the corporate-voting-machine crippled outcome in FL in 2000; the same machines Reagan used to decide elections in banana republics.

[Jerry Cronk]

06:27 PM on 02/11/2010

Here's my proposed constitutional amendment and this should take care of the corporate personhood problem:
PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
A well functioning democracy depends on an open and fair public marketplace of ideas. The benefits of democracy are impaired by the infusion of disproportionate sums of money into the political arena by some whose voices are thereby able to drown out those of others. The political process is corrupted when concentrations of wealth in the hands of a few people and corporations is used to promote or oppose some candidates or officeholders to the exclusion of others or is used to influence legislation or public policy.
For these reasons Congress and state and local legislatures may regulate the amount of money spent on or contributed to elections or to influence legislation or public policy. They may do so through establishing agencies with rulemaking and enforcement authority;
Provided, however, that they may not do so in a manner that effectively favors or disfavor particular candidates or particular legislation or policies;
Nor may legislation infringe the freedoms of regular newspapers or other regular news media to report news or express their views.

[lvogt]

03:17 PM on 02/05/2010

It should state clearly that only a human being is a person and only people may, as separate individuals with equal rights and limitations, contribute and participate in elections and campaigns.

While were on it: No private person or entity may own, manage or control the means of voting for any public office.

[jeremyfive]

03:09 PM on 02/05/2010

That's what I'M talkin' about!!!!

Chris Dodd steps up!!!

[petera63]

03:04 PM on 02/05/2010

And how's Dodd planning to pass this amendment?

[lvogt]

03:38 PM on 02/05/2010

Well, the first logical step is to propose it.
Besides, just seeing who supports it and who's against it can be very useful politically.

[kent4620]

01:33 PM on 02/05/2010

We'll take care of this right after I help pass finance reform.

[kat1944]

01:24 PM on 02/05/2010

What's the matter Dodd, afraid they'll cut you pay and make their own commercials?

[Jim Marusak]

01:06 PM on 02/05/2010

why do we not just enforce the laws as they are on the books and call the excessive campaign contributions by the elite and the corporations what they are: felony bribery. if a large campaign contribution can be linked indirectly or directly to votes on the house or senate floors or to the signing of certain bills by the president, then it should be considered bribery, pure and simple. for politicians accepting the bribe (disguised as a large campaign donation), they lose their office immediately upon conviction and head to the federal pen. for those who handed the bribe out, natural people will be sent to prison and be fined 20% of their gross income for the past year while corporations will have their officers and board imprisoned as well as the company being fined 20% of their gross receipts from the past 12 months for a first offense (2nd offense would lead to disbanding the company and sale of all assets).

much simpler than a consitutional amendment. just a change in the bribery law that could be done with a simple majority vote.

too simple to work?

[Horus45]

01:24 PM on 02/05/2010

The decision did not have to do with corporations making direct contributions to Politicians.
What it did was to allow them to spend unlimited funds on campaign commercials and PACS.

[mamsandwich]

10:20 AM on 02/07/2010

I like this. Would the Corporate lawyers squash a Public Defender?

[GoldStarMom]

12:22 PM on 02/05/2010

If they are going to do this, they need to be really short, straight, and simple in how they word it.

For example, few parts might be...

A person is a living breathing human who is also a member of the species Homo sapiens, and the subspecies Homo sapiens sapiens.

Only a person is entitled to the protections and rights enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and Constitution of the United States of America.

[mamsandwich]

11:47 AM on 02/05/2010

The very people who are throwing scary ‘isms’ around have a new real scary one they have helped create. ‘Corporatism’. Capitalism as we know is gone. The small business owner will soon have no representation. Corporations have no limits on contributions to political leaders with the new ruling from the Supreme Court yesterday. Corporate lobbyist have too much power now, 'we ain’t seen nothing yet!' Unions have no limits either. Most Union workers are employed by corporations. With this new corporate power, (like it wasn’t out of control already), we could see Unions eventually be eliminated.

When this country was formed corporations were under strict regulations by the government. In 1819, the U.S. Supreme Court granted corporations a plethora of rights they had not previously recognized or enjoyed. The Corporation as a whole was labeled an "artificial person," possessing both individuality and immortality.*wikipedia.org.
Teabaggers have been screaming that they want their America back, it’s gone! We are now the United States of Corporate America.

Change this Supreme Court ruling!

[JPMac]

12:12 PM on 02/05/2010

Wow your clueless, all union employees work for companies.

Capitalism has raised more people from poverty and oppressive governements than any government in history.

[bdeery]

01:22 PM on 02/05/2010

Thats because capitalism, especially in the industrial revolution, was more aligned with what society needed. There has to be regulation for this system to work and its impossible for the regulating body to do this when at the same time they're accepting legal bribes from corporations.

[mamsandwich]

10:12 AM on 02/07/2010

Companies like, General Motors, Proctor and Gamble, Con-Ag, Nabisco, General Mills and on and on are companies that are corporations. Update you history. Capitalism is a great thing run by human beings, some with consciences. Capitalism makes us better. Corporate greed is ruining America. More power for Corporatism is not what this country needs. More power for the individual with an innovative brain and start up loans from banks is what this country needs. That's good old fashion capitalism!

[Gabrielle]

11:34 AM on 02/05/2010

That's good...will it work?
I've become so suspicious of the whole "shebang"

[Linda from Deerfield]

11:24 AM on 02/05/2010

There is a Saudi sheik who owns a big chunk of News Corp who isn't going to like this.

[MNmommy]

11:08 AM on 02/05/2010

Useless.

Why don't you head on back to CT now?