Citizens United Going Down? Democrats Introduce Constitutional Amendment To Overturn Ruling

[Galraedia]

The Supreme Court may treat corporations like people who can spend whatever they want on elections, but the American people don't have to accept it, said Democratic senators who proposed a constitutional amendment Tuesday to retake control of campaign spending.

The amendment, introduced by Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.), doesn't directly address the justices' legal finding that corporations have a right to free speech that was curtailed by election law. Instead, it would add to the Constitution language that says Congress and the states can regulate campaign contributions and expenditures.

The amendment would effectively reverse two landmark Supreme Court decisions -- the 1976 ruling in Buckley v. Valeo, which said spending money in elections is a form of speech, and the 2010 ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which ruled it unconstitutional to regulate the money spent to influence elections by corporations and unions.

The Citizens United ruling has unleashed a flood of cash from corporations and super PACs, which can spend as much as they want and do so nearly in secret.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/01/citizens-united-constitutional-amendment_n_1069596.html

[Firebrand Gary]

1. Well, its about time. Let's hope a bipartisan group of Senators enlist O'Connor, Souter and Stevens

To assist. This nation belongs to the people not corporations and I am pretty sure those two former republican appointed justices would agree with the democratic appointed one. Their support would show this nation something that it has never seen before.

[The Wielding Truth]

2. Hello, Mitt. Corporations are NOT people.

[shraby]

3. It has a high hurdle to pass in congress..2/3 of both houses,

then 3/4 of the states have to approve it. Going to take some time. The Supremes don't have a say in it.

[Firebrand Gary]

4. It can be done. I actually think that it has a chance.

I can visualize a lot of conservative and religious voices getting behind this.

[DCKit]

17. People are pissed. It's common ground amongst Progressives, Libertarians and Teabaggers.

If that's the only place we can find common ground, it's one hell of a start.

They'll quash it at their peril.

[Cresent City Kid]

5. I'm relieved

I was going to create a test case by marrying a corporation. Seriously, though I'm glad they're thinking in these terms. I think the Founding Fathers left this language out because it should go without saying.

[Firebrand Gary]

6. So I just read the article as posted on Huffpo, it amends the Constitution to regulate contributions

It does not ban them entirely. In my opinion this is a joke that is targeted to "capitalize" on the OWS movement. Apparently the Democratic party thinks that a patch will fix the issue and that this will be acceptable to the people.

The only positive that I see in this that it is a potential step in the forward direction. Starting the dialog in this manner should capture some of the GOP Senators. Senator Udall introduced the amendment which basically confirms that assumption.

[Cid_B]

7. No.... No it's not...

0.000% chance due to the requirements for a constitutional amendment and the fact that both Ds and Rs benefit from the ruling is it stands.

[ellisonz]

8. Pass the Amendment!

[CrackersMcGee]

9. Citizens United was exactly the WRONG direction this country needs to go.

[newfie11]

10. I fear as long as our politicians are being bought off this won't pass

I hope I am wrong.

[SpiralHawk]

11. This is a fabulous legitimate debate for the 2012 elections

no doubt there will be tons of shit floated against it -- but just bringing it totally front and center in peoples' minds is a hugh step forward...

[MineralMan]

12. It's a great idea. Sadly, it hasn't a prayer of success.

More's the pity.

[NYC Liberal]

13. Time to call a Constitutional Convention, as Congress will never vote for it.

We have a better chance getting 2/3 of the state legislatures calling a convention than 2/3 of the House and Senate.

[CanonRay]

14. I'll take it, but it doesn't go far enough

it should say corporations are NOT people, clearly and unambiguously.

[DirkGently]

15. An amendment is a longshot, but the conversation is definitely worth having.

[Initech]

16. This is one amendment I can definitely get behind!

[Elsewheres Grandson]

18. I thought only Rethuglicans could intro C.A. s

Lol! :rofl:

[burrowowl]

19. Well

are they going to fight and follow through. People, get behind them.

[moondust]

20. Bravo!

K/R