Over the weekend, the New Mexico Senate joined the House in passing a resolution opposing Citizens United and calling for the U.S. Congress to send the states a constitutional amendment to overturn it. I'm proud to have co-sponsored the Senate solution (SM3) and cast the vote to allow our state to begin re-establishing our right to regulate elections. I strongly urge citizens across the country to keep pushing their states to do the same.
The Citizens United decision was more than just a blow to democracy. It was a blow to states' rights. Now states are scrambling to overturn the ruling and put their own campaign finance laws back in place.
In his dissent, Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens derided the ruling for not only striking down a large portion of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform act, but also because "it compounds the offense by implicitly striking down a great many state laws as well."
Cities and states across the country have been moving toward implementing so-called "clean elections" by allowing candidates the option of accepting public financing in lieu of private contributions. Albuquerque adopted public financing for city offices, and we were working to have the rest of the state follow suit when this ruling was passed down.
What the nation's highest court has effectively done is allowed our elections to be commercialized. Just as corporate America deluges us daily with messages about what products to buy and which services to hire, this decision will allow the corporate marketing of candidates. Instead of: "This product will make you sexier / happier / more wealthy," it will be: "This candidate is (or is not) sexier / smarter / more likable."
This shilling of candidates will not only make our political landscape more and more acrimonious, it will also make it impossible to elect candidates who represent the people. Just think of our best presidents -- Abraham Lincoln, Franklin Delano Roosevelt.... Do you think that they could win a present-day election given the commercialization of our modern culture -- including our elections?
Political campaigns should be about issues. For those like me, elections should also be about promises kept or broken. Candidates should not win or lose because of money, or who looks best on TV and has the snappiest sound bites. Candidates should be about ideals, integrity, and fidelity to the common good.
Likewise, governing should not be about personal power. Governing, as it was envisioned by our founding fathers, should be about empowering the people. That is done by investing each individual, rich or poor, with an equal voice: their vote. The death knell for democracy will sound the day we allow money to become more powerful than the vote. The current outpouring of support for working families and the 99% shows that it hasn't happened yet.
Democracy requires vigilance, but we have proven that New Mexicans are up to the task. If there was ever time for a constitutional convention called by the states, it is now.
We must do more than fight for our right to decide who represents us in Washington. We must fight for the right to make our decisions without the cacophony of those who would influence our votes to further their own ends.
Join my campaign and together we will fight to overturn Citizens United: www.griegoforcongress.com.
Follow Eric Griego on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Griego4Congress
Reading this makes me proud to be a New Mexican.
With the educational outreach from people like Stephen Colbert and the actions of states like Montana in showing how absolutely ridiculous the Citizen's United ruling was, we may actually stem the ever increasing tide of corporate interference into elections.
For those who feel that the reactions like those of New Mexico's legislature are ridiculous on principal, please look at elections since the ruling- insane amounts of money spent on popularity contests with a focus on attacks by third parties instead of candidates announcing their own strengths and policies..these are not elections, they are simply American Idol with the future of our country at stake.
CU was a victory for democracy. Just deal with it. Voters, if you don't like a political ad, ignore it.
From 1791 to 1886 1st Amendment freedoms applied only to flesh and blood citizens.
From 1886 to 1973 citizens and media corporations enjoyed equal freedoms of speech and the press.
From 1974 to present only commercial media enjoy unrestricted freedoms. Congress amended FECA in 1974 to set limits on contributions by individuals, political parties and PACs.
2 USC 431 (9) (B) (i) The term "expenditure" does not include any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee, or candidate;
But what is the difference between slanted news stories or editorial opinions and political ads?
To restore equal protection under law the press exemption must be extended to citizens and groups!
The NRA bought a radio station. But should a group of citizens have to buy a radio station to speak or a newspaper to print their views?
The Credo super PAC will be different from other super PACs in key ways. Instead of relying on wealthy donors - such as Newt Gingrich's super-PAC patron Sheldon Adelson, the casino magnate whose family has contributed $10 million in support of Gingrich - Credo's super PAC will focus on small donors. So far, the average contribution from its 20,000 donors has been $20, Bond said.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/02/13/MNDN1N67VU.DTL&tsp=1
And most of the donations to comedian Stephen Colbert's Super PAC were under $250.
http://www.kfvs12.com/story/16644573/stephen-colbert-super-pac-raises-1-million
Before insisting on more people muzzling campaign laws watch these videos
http://www.ij.org/freedomflix/33-sampson
http://www.ij.org/freedomflix/15-camppolitics
http://www.ij.org/freedomflix/39-azcleanelectionsvideo
and read the Citizens Guide to participating in Federal elections. http://ww.fec.gov/pages/brochures/citizens.shtml
http://judgepedia.org/index.php/Common_Cause
http://www.commoncause.org/site/pp.asp?c=dkLNK1MQIwG&b=4860191
And Democracy 21, which works to eliminate the influence of big money in US politics, is also a 501(c)(4) organization. It receives grants from The Pew Charitable Trusts, Carnegie Corporation of New York, The Joyce Foundation, The Rockefeller Foundation, Open Society Institute and the Piper Fund and contributions from individuals.
http://www.democracy21.org/index.asp?Type=B_PR&SEC=%7b3E522118-9BCF-4129-A19D-A568670FEBBF%7d
Are these organizations just an attempt by the 1% to represent themselves as the 99% and push campaign reform onto the national agenda?
I suggest reading Free Speech Needs Jerry Maguire by Ryan Sager: http://amendment10.tripod.com/jerrymaguire.htm. The following is an excerpt: “That's because campaign-finance reform is not a "movement" as its proponents have claimed, it is a lobby -- funded and orchestrated by eight very liberal foundations which fooled Congress and the American people into believing that the front groups they set up were grassroots organizations.”