There are those who say that money doesn't really matter. What matters, they say, is the quality of the candidates and the strength of their ideas. Unfortunately, in a world of high-stakes and high-cost media, this is nonsense.
For those who think that our election system is fundamentally on the wrong track, the only option is to amend the Constitution to allow Congress and the States to do what is necessary to restore some level of sanity to campaign finance rules.
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.
Citizens United destroys the American notion of citizenship by creating separate and unequal classes of Americans. It creates a de facto American House of Lords, in which all other Americans are relegated to second-class citizenship.
By accepting Super PAC money, Obama is all but guaranteeing that the special interests of the richest 0.01% will dominate the interests of the 99% and his second term will accomplish little to right the balance.
If the critics of Citizens United want to be taken seriously, they must move beyond superficial slogans and focus on the real issue at stake: When should the government be allowed to regulate political contributions and expenditures -- even if they are speech?
I support passing a constitutional amendment to restore accountability and transparency to federal and state elections -- ensuring that when you see a political ad on TV, you know exactly who's responsible for it.
Simply overturning Citizens United won't provide us with a campaign system that provides fair results. We were doing poorly before Citizens United, too. We need a far more aggressive change than just overturning that one ruling.
In the wake of Citizens United, Americans have a choice: sit back and watch our democracy erode, or work to undo the decision and restore individual rights in the face of the false notion of "corporate personhood."
It is laughable that candidates who claim to advocate "small government" and "less regulation" want to intrude on the private lives of American citizens, but what interests me more is whether or not such a constitutional amendment is even possible.
It's time for a revolution. Not a physical one, but a political one. A revolution that turns over the establishment's apple cart, challenges this corrupt system and brings back our democracy. Get ready for 2012.
The rich use their money to legally bribe politicians to support policies that favor themselves over the middle class in the auction that we call elections. And the policies they support are different from those supported by the majority of middle class Americans voters.
While many supporters of the Occupy demonstrators are agitated over public officials' growing demands that the Occupy settlers move off the occupied grounds, how might the Occupy movement move forward?