How to Fight Citizens United

September 21, 2012

Ever since the Citizens United ruling opened the floodgates to unlimited political spending (and even before), our friends at Open Secrets, The Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause, The Sunlight Foundation, Democracy 21, Public Citizen and countless other organizations have been working to turn back the tide. Click through to read about six initiatives democracy watchdogs are hoping will help clean up our elections and get money out of politics.

A rally to amend the constitution held in Spokane, WA. (Public Citizen)

1) AMEND THE CONSTITUTION
The movement for a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United has quickly gone from pipe dream to mainstream, says Public Citizen’s Rachel Lewis. Since the Citizens United ruling, over 300 cities, towns and counties have passed resolutions calling for an amendment, as have seven state legislatures. Over the summer, President Obama voiced his support.

Take Action
Through the Resolutions Week website, you can find out how to get your own town to pass a resolution calling for a constitutional amendment.

Public Citizen is organizing people all over the country to help gather signatures for their petition. Common Cause also has a petition you can sign.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next »

From the show

Full Show: Hurricanes, Capitalism & Democracy

Related Features

TOPICS: Democracy & Government, Money & Politics

TAGS: citizens united, dark money, money and politics, mopo, take action, widget

Are you aware of our Comment Policy?

Babsfamily
We live in California and support MovetoAmend, ‘We the People, Not We the Corporations’. How do we join forces and put Ciitzens United out of its misery?
http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Lesley-Jones/1251073028 James Lesley Jones
Bill, Watch this documentary about the super rich and their political machinery down South.
http://www.linktv.org/programs/koch-brothers-exposed
http://www.facebook.com/people/James-Lesley-Jones/1251073028 James Lesley Jones
Koch Brothers Exposed is a hard-hitting investigation of the 1% at its very worst. This full-length documentary film on Charles and David Koch — two of the world’s richest and most powerful men — is the latest from acclaimed director Robert Greenwald (Wal-Mart: the High Cost of Low Price, Outfoxed, Rethink Afghanistan). The billionaire brothers bankroll a vast network of organizations that work to undermine the interests of the 99% on issues ranging from Social Security to the environment to civil rights. This film looks to uncover corruption by the Kochs — and points the way to how Americans can reclaim their democracy
Robert Cohen
Dear Bill,
Please consider endorsing my proposed strategy to get the money-givers out of politics. I think it is likely to be faster than, more likely to succeed than, and should be pursued in parallel with, the constitutional-amendment strategy. I encourage you to call this strategy to the attention of your viewers, and to the attention of leaders of the Occupy Movement. And I encourage people who view this comment to rally to this cause.
Although this initiative’s odds of success may be low, a victory would be a tremendous first step toward peacefully rebelling against corporate rule. Hence I conclude that the nation cannot afford NOT to try it. Even if we lose this attempt, pursuing this initiative is quite likely to have great educational value toward better informing the electorate.
For a succinct summary of my proposal, please note my comment in response to your recent article about Medicare. It is the fourth comment below your article at URL
Also, please note two favorable responses to my comment, which are shown, indented, right below it.
My comment attempted, In the limited space available, to summarize the case for moving forward with filing multiple court challenges to the absurd Santa Clara (“corporations are persons”) and Buckley (“money is speech”) Supreme Court decisions, which will attract widespread public support as they move toward Supreme Court resolution. Recent polls indicate that at least 80% of the citizenry are disgusted by the legalized corruption of our political leaders by the obscene amounts of money-in-politics. And public opinion has swayed previous Supreme Courts. To succeed in this endeavor, all we need do is to sway one of the five conservative Justices.
Two recent developments encourage me to think that my proposed initiative might succeed. One of them was the defection of Chief Justice Roberts on Obamneycare, who I think will go down in history as a true American patriot for having courageously avoided thrusting the nation into a chaotic health-care situation. The other was the initial victory of Chris Hedges et al. in their lawsuit, Hedges v. Obama.
Sincerely,
Robert
Robert Cohen, Ph.D., ConsultantSpecialist in Ocean Thermal Energy,1410 Sunshine Canyon Drive, Boulder, Colorado 80302; (303) 443-4884; mobile: (303) 249-7859
http://www.facebook.com/roxanne.watson.543 Roxanne Watson
the way to get the ugly out is for everyone eligible to vote to get out there and do it.Everyone knows that big money mobilizes votes for their interest.I have been signing folks up for organ donation as a NY State initiative where voters app also has organ donation app included.I have talked to many that think corporate America votes are the only ones that count.When you have the time to explain the inportance and the history of the voters rights act they get it.I have personally signed up 355 voters and 71 organ donors in the last 15 days by popping a tent at a Rockland Community College and the Palisades Mall.I would be there everyday but my newly transplanted heart needs a break.All it takes is a few folks if I can do it as a transplant recipient think what abled bodied caring healthy people can do.No excuse damnit just vote for somebody then you will feel like it counts
arguethefacts
Why go through Congress? Sending begging notices to Congress to please make an Amendment against Citizen’s United will never work because the Republicans have too much of a vested interest in Citizen’s United.
The states can amend the Constitution. Starting working in the states. The 21st Amendment repealing the 19th Prohibition Amendment was not done through Congress. It was done through state legislatures. Instead of petition Congress have these cities and towns repeal the Amendment through their state legislatures. Absolutely no action by Congress is required.
http://www.robertcohen.org/ Robert Cohen
You are correct about Congress, since a leopard can’t readily change its own spots. But trying a constitutional amendment is unlikely to succeed. Even if it could succeed, it will take too long to do so, since meanwhile this country is going down the tubes too rapidly and too irreversibly.
Please note my comment of yesterday, suggesting a judicial approach that could succeed much more rapidly, as in the fairly rapid resolution of court challenges to Obamneycare.
Tom
Quit voting for Republocrats. If most of us wasted our votes on Jill Stein or Gary Johnson, one of these ‘unowned’ candidates would be our president .. look at who these people are for ‘our’ sakes. If most of us wasted our votes on a 3rd Party candidate for Congress, an unowned 3rd Party candidate would be a Congressman. A 3rd Party POTUS can use Executive Orders just like the previous Kings of the US did. Banks and corporations must be removed from our government .. completely. It’s easy .. it just takes some cojones. No human being can be allowed (no ditch digger or corporate CEO or union) to put money into a campaign or legislative initiative. All campaigns must be paid through our taxes to level the playing field. All candidates get guaranteed airtime with all networks, newspapers, etc…. deduct the expenses from their taxes. Candidate need to fly somewhere? … airlines fly them and deduct. Stay in a hotel? … hotels deduct. Pay for staff? … deduct. I think you get the idea. The playing field must be leveled for all who want to be a part of this wonderful, democratic process. This way, a talented ditch digger has an equal opportunity to represent us just like a successful CEO. We need a stirring pot of ideas. We look to much to business skills and professional politicians as clearance for leadership .. some of these people are successful screwups.
Paul Moser
United Re:public is a great organization that deserves attention. The group includes former FEC chair Trevor Potter and Harvard law Prof Lawrence Lessig. The group is proposing a piece of legislation–vetted for constitutionality–that will get anonymous, dirty money out of not just election campaigns, but out of lobbying as well. Check out their website. They are looking for 1 million “co-sponsor” citizens who will sign the document.
http://www.facebook.com/JOHNSONJARED174 Jared Johnson
SHARED by JARED!
treegirl59
How about voting EVERYONE out of Congress/Senate, and placing our best neighbors into their job? Then we should be able to pass some great stuff through!
Mike
Unlimited political spending? It’s likely 99% of political contributions wind up in media coffers. The more “political noise” the more political contributions. In return the media doesn’t expose or discuss important national issues.
Anonymous
The DISCLOSE Act voted down in the Senate…with a Democratic majority! That alone should tell everyone that there truly is little, if any real, difference between the Republican and Democratic parties.
http://twitter.com/jerryabr Gerald Abrahamson
The US Supreme Court has already approved gay marriage at the federal level. This is based on the Citizens-United decision.
The C-U decision was very simple. It boils down to a “legal person” (corporation) has the right to access rights available to a “real person”–even though the corporation is dramatically different than a “real person” (you can legally buy/sell a corporation, for example) . A corporation can not vote (yet?). And so on.
By definition, a “real person” is a “legal person”. Thus, anyone can marry anyone else–if they both agree. Why?
The US Supreme Court stated, in its C-U decision, the LITERAL definition of a person is irrelevant–only the LEGAL definition. Thus, if one person agrees to be in the “woman/female/spouse” role in a marriage ceremony, and another agrees to be the “man/male/spouse” role in a marriage ceremony, that is “good enough” for the Supreme Court. The individuals do NOT have to be one “male” and one “female”–only that they have the *rights* of “male/spouse” and “female/spouse” as they have chosen. One is the designated “corporate man” and the other is the designated “corporate woman”, regardless of their actual sex). Thus, they can be legally married under State law.
Why is this true? The right of marriage belongs to the individual person. Per the US Constitution (Article IV, Section 2, first sentence or paragraph):
‘The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States’
The word “Citizens” is not limited or restricted to one sex or the other. Thus, both sexes have equal rights as “Citizens” per the US Constitution. There are no “States’ rights” to discuss because the US Constitution specifically dictated what the States were required to do. All the States were required to grant “all Privileges and Immunities” to all “Citizens”–which is why the word “shall” was used in that sentence. States do NOT have a choice in the matter.
How can a corporation be a citizen? If it is “born in the USA”, then it is, per the US Constitution–and US Supreme Court decisions–a US citizen.
A state could choose to not have civil marriage. But that is just the state making a choice. It would not prevent any and all churches from performing marriages as they saw fit. The First Amendment would not prevent religious organizations from performing marriages. It would just mean the state bureaucracy ignored who was–and who was not–married.
Thus, the US Constitution clearly–and unambiguously–states each and every *individual* citizen has the right to ask to marry who they choose (that is the “Privileges” part)–and the person who is asked has the right to agree or say no. The state may not interfere with that selection or response in any way (other than to determine if both parties are legally able to enter into such an agreement–i.e. if they are of legal age). If the State interferes by passing a law limiting marriage in some unreasonable way (limiting marriage to being exclusively between one man and one woman, for example), it violates this portion of the US Constitution. That makes State law limiting marriage to “one man and one woman” unconstitutional–because each and every individual State agreed to comply with the US Constitution as an unconditional requirement before being allowed to become a US State. The State knowingly passed a law that violated the US Constitution’s unconditional guarantee of the rights of all citizens, thus the State law is null and void.
Continuing with the Citizens-United logic of the US Supreme Court, which sex is a corporation? How do you tell which corporation is which sex? Where is the sex of the corporation shown on the corporate birth or marriage certificate?
It is relevant because Mitt Romney says “corporations are people, my friend”. If this statement is true, then corporations are people, people are not slaves, and people are not allowed to be bought or sold–per the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. All stock markets have now been determined to be illegal, because stock markets buy and sell pieces of corporate people (or even entire corporations/people). Since people can not be bought or sold, the only way to get a merger or acquisition is through legal marriage. And that is where the real fun begins for everyone.
There must be one “man” corporation and one “woman” corporation (in order to comply with the claim “marriage is limited to one man and one woman”). So, which corporation is “man” and which is “woman”? Neither is man or woman. They are the same sex. Thus, same-sex marriage has been approved by the US legal system, including all the churches, for over a century. The “marriage rule” for corporations can be used by other “people” as well. It is long-established legal tradition, after all….
Divorce is supposedly impossible due to the “sanctity of marriage” claim–or at least one would think so. Divorce is the #1 cause of the end of a marriage. Here we see some real mental contortions by those with irrational thinking. The US public never sees a “pro marriage” group seeking to pass a law–or a consitutional amendment–prohibiting divorce. Nor do we ever see these “sanctity of marriage” people protesting in front of the houses and offices of divorce lawyers or Divorce Court. No divorce = no end to marriage = end of the problem for those who cite the “sanctity of marriage” and enforcement of the “’til death do us part” bit in the marriage vows.
Then we face the problem of multiple spouses. Companies buy and sell each other all the time. How was that permitted? When they were “things” and not “people”, that can work. But corporations are now people. Which means corporations are limited to ONE marriage during their existence. Think about it. How do you “kill” a corporation? You can’t. No divorce allowed. So, once two corporations are “married”, it is “’til death do us part”. Corporations never die, so they are married forever. Nor can a corporation ever be closed–because that would be murder (as defined under law–killing of a “person”). We know that “one” plus “one” equals “two”. So, adding another to the marriage becomes a problem–because the law of mathematics does not say “two” plus “one” (or more) equals “two”.
Moving on, how do we know a corporation is alive? Again, we look at the argument made. The claim is “life begins at conception”. If this is true, then we are forced to follow it to its logical conclusion. The first time someone has an idea, they conceived it. Which, by definition, means it is alive (“life begins at conception”–remember?). To claim otherwise contradicts the stated reality: Apple was “conceived” in the 1970s–and today (Nov 2012) is the corporation (“person”) with the largest valuation in US history. It is illegal to kill another person (under US law, anyway). So everyone is stuck with those ideas forever.
Taxes. Now that “corporations are people”, that means the entire corporate tax code can be immediately scrapped. They now get the exact same treatment as any other person does. Real people are not allowed to take certain deductions or get preferential treatment of income or expenses–so neither can corporation people get them. Make lots of snacks and watch the fun begin !!! We will get to the watch the politicians madly scramble to protect their sources of poltical cash….
You thought this was NOT about MONEY ??? ROFLMAO !!!
Anonymous
ill believe a corporation is a person when i see one go to jail
http://www.facebook.com/linda.lovell.501 Linda Lovell
Support movetoamend.org and The American Anticorruption Act at represent.us . Both go a long way toward solving the problem.