Co-authored with U.S. Senators Dick Durbin, Jeff Merkley, Chuck Schumer, and Sheldon Whitehouse
Now more than ever, the American people are showing just how fed up they are with the explosion of big corporate influence over our politics. And now more than ever, the Supreme Court is ignoring its own precedents to unleash a torrent of corporate and special interest money into our elections.
We must put the American people back in charge of our democracy. If the Supreme Court refuses to allow Congress and individual states to regulate the role of money in our elections, we must amend the Constitution to change that -- and together, we are beginning the amendment process this month.
Passing a constitutional amendment is no easy feat -- we've only passed 27 in our entire history, and powerful corporate interests are already lining up against us. But an incredible people-powered campaign to restore our democracy is already mounting, unlike anything we have ever seen.
Since launching our petition at ReverseCitizensUnited.com yesterday, over 50,000 activists have already stood up to demand this constitutional amendment, which would allow Congress and the states to enact common-sense campaign finance reforms.
If you've read this far, please take a moment to sign our petition, too.
Historically, Congress and state legislatures have established contribution limits, disclosure requirements, and other rules to limit the influence of special interests in elections and ensure that government works for the American people, not powerful corporations.
Then, in last year's controversial Citizens United vs. FEC decision, Republican appointees on the Supreme Court overturned prior precedent and struck down Congress' sensible regulations on corporate spending in political campaigns.
A key solution to address the root cause of this problem is to amend the Constitution to make it absolutely clear to the Supreme Court and the special interests that Congress and state governments have the power to limit the flow of corporate money into campaigns.
Our constitutional amendment will stop the growing corrosive influence of big business on our elections and on our government, but it won't pass unless the American people speak out and demand it.
These historic times call for extraordinary measures to ensure our government remains of the people, by the people and for the people, not just powerful interests with the deepest pockets.
Thank you for standing with us to return our elections to the hands of everyday citizens, rather than the special interests.
Follow Sen. Tom Udall on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SenatorTomUdall
Rep. Ted Deutch: The OCCUPIED Amendment, H. J. Res 90
Senator Bernie Sanders: Saving American Democracy Amendment, S. J. Res 33
at http://www.theoccupiedamendment.org/.
There is no way you will get Hollywood support for this, and Silicon Valley won't like it either.
People may say that there is no difference between Democrats and Republicans, but this amendment is a clear example that there is. In fact, there are very very few 100-0 votes.
I'm going to put my name on a list put together by Congresspersons.
Just how long will it take before they send the FBI or IRS?
Just how out of your mind crazy does somebody have to be to trust these guys and their staff?
Giving your name to the very corrupt, venal government individuals that you want to limit?
Like they won't use it against you?
Tell that to the Occupy groups.
I'd rather put my name on Ratigan's Get the Money Out - and be subjected to GE pfishing.
It is their future and I am hoping they get engaged.
Banker supporting OWS and ethical capitalism.
If that means public financing of elections fine. We are not anything like broke in this country it is just that to few people have all the money...thanks to, you guessed it...all the cash influence and peddling in our politics.
We need to stop being involved in a 2 year campaign every 4 years anyway...it is insane.
I understand the feeling of not liking big business exerting too much control on the races, but who gets to draw the line, where, and how? All of this can quickly turn muddy and put aspects of free speech at risk. I believe this was par of the courts reasoning. If you want to try to fight the presence of big money in races you might have to try fighting through things like public financing (reduce the need) and transparency (show more clearly who is funding things) than in restricting speech.
nothing."
Edmund Burke
P.S. I was honored to add my name to the petition.
“I support the constitutional amendment to give Congress and states the authority to limit corporate and special interest money in our elections.”
I prefer an amendment which clearly states that only private US citizens, i.e., only individuals, neither businesses nor interest groups, shall be allowed to contribute to federal elections.
Giving our politicians the authority to “limit” leaves the door wide open.
Of course, in that few if any of our politicians would support removing their career funding, it’s not likely that much progress will be made on this subject until we have a major overhaul of our corrupt system, and that’ll take a new Constitutional Convention, for it can’t be left up to our office holders to achieve anything substantive where they are not the prime beneficiaries.
Public Financing ONLY?
- One 'pot' split between the parties...
- Would make it MUCH easier for 3rd + parties...
- Companies/SI/PACs could contribute to the 'pot' ONLY...
Give it a little time to work and we can iron out the wrinkles.