Skip to content

Bill to Overturn Citizens United…

June 24, 2012

I doubt that this is going to happen anytime soon, but it is a positive development that a bill to reverse the disastrous Citizens United bill has been introduced…let’s hope this gains traction.

Rep. Adam Schiff, at a hearing on windstorm response issues in Pasadena, earlier this year.

Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) this week introduced a constitutional amendment to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s controversial Citizens United decision. The decision opened the floodgates on campaign contributions from corporations.

In that time, so-called “super PACs” have grown into huge political juggernauts, fed on a steady diet of cash since the Supreme Court threw out a decades-old ban on unlimited corporate contributions.

In the landmark 5-4 decision handed down two years ago, the court’s conservative bloc found that corporations had the same right to political free speech as individuals, and so could not be stopped from spending to help their favored candidates.

In a statement on Monday announcing the proposed constitutional amendment, Schiff said the consequences of that decision have been “disastrous,” citing the deluge of money flowing to political action committees, or PACs, which, although separate from a candidate’s campaign, can work on the campaign’s behalf so long as no coordination between the PAC and campaign takes place.

“The growth of the super PACs is just the most recent and disastrous result of a series of Supreme Court decisions that seek to distinguish between contributions to a candidate and direct expenditures that have the same effect,” Schiff said.

The amendment, which was sent to the House Judiciary Committee, would also overturn a Supreme Court decision — Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett — that struck down an Arizona law that allowed public financing of a candidate if that candidate’s opponent exceeded certain spending limits, according to Schiff’s office.

By any standard, the proposed amendment has a long journey ahead if it ever hopes to become law. It would have to pass in both the House and Senate by a two-thirds majority, and then be ratified by three-fourths, or 38, of the nation’s states.

“I have always been loath to amend the Constitution, but this tragic line of reasoning by the Supreme Court has so threatened the health of our democracy that I am moved to introduce today’s amendment,” Schiff said.


From → Archives

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: