Wayne group battles Citizens United

Posted 8/21/12

HONESDALE, PA — The advocacy group Wayne Citizens to Reclaim Democracy issued a press release pointing out that there were dozens of ballot measures across the country in this past election that …

This item is available in full to subscribers.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Wayne group battles Citizens United

Posted

HONESDALE, PA — The advocacy group Wayne Citizens to Reclaim Democracy issued a press release pointing out that there were dozens of ballot measures across the country in this past election that supported a constitutional amendment to reverse the impact of the Citizens United and other decisions of the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) that allow unlimited spending by corporations to influence elections.

In the ballot measures, citizens from both sides of the aisle voted overwhelmingly in favor of the amendment, which basically says that money is not speech, as SCOTUS has ruled, and corporations are not people.

According to Movetoamend.org, “In Mentor and Chagrin Falls, Ohio the votes were respectively 66% and 70% in support. In Alachua County, Florida, voters supported Move to Amend’s campaign by 72%. Voters in Edwardsville, IL supported Move to Amend’s resolution by 77%.” The organization says that 16 state legislatures and 600 towns, villages and cities have voted in favor of the amendment.

This comes as corporations, candidates, superpacs and others spent $4 billion on advertising in the midterm election, making it the most expensive midterm in history.

Critics of the amendment say the constitutional amendments would take away the First Amendment free speech rights of the wealthy and of corporations. But proponents, including Sen. Chuck Schumer, say the right of free speech is not absolute, which is why there can be limits or bans on some speech such as child pornography. Further, supporters say free speech rights need to be balanced with the ideal of one person, one vote, which is as deeply enshrined in the constitution as the right of free speech.

“Our elected representatives are most likely to answer to those who keep them in the money,” said Katharine Dodge, founder of Wayne Citizens to Reclaim Democracy. “In today’s current political scene, the candidates with the most airtime and the slickest campaigns are going to win. That means lots of money to pay those who will promote them. It takes thousands if not millions of individual supporters to equal the amounts given by just one billionaire or one superpac. Is this reflecting the voices and needs of the ordinary citizen?”

The proposed amendment has two sections. Section one says, “The rights protected by the Constitution of the United States are the rights of natural persons only.

“Artificial entities established by the laws of any State, the United States, or any foreign state shall have no rights under this Constitution and are subject to regulation by the People, through Federal, State, or local law.

“The privileges of artificial entities shall be determined by the people, through federal, state, or local law, and shall not be construed to be inherent or inalienable.”

Section two says, “Federal, state, and local government shall regulate, limit, or prohibit contributions and expenditures, including a candidate’s own contributions and expenditures, to ensure that all citizens, regardless of their economic status, have access to the political process, and that no person gains, as a result of their money, substantially more access or ability to influence in any way the election of any candidate for public office or any ballot measure.

“Federal, State, and local government shall require that any permissible contributions and expenditures be publicly disclosed.

“The judiciary shall not construe the spending of money to influence elections to be speech under the First Amendment.”

Comments

No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here