Dems Consider New Laws in Response to Supreme Court Campaign Finance Decision

[highplainsdem]

http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2010/01/21/politics/politicalhotsheet/entry6126457.shtml

Democrats on Capitol Hill are already planning new legislation to bolster campaign finance restrictions, after the Supreme Court today threw out laws limiting corporate and union campaign spending. One Democrat in the House has already introduced a constitutional amendment to reverse the decision, Politico reports.

Iowa Democratic Rep. Leonard Boswell's proposed constitutional amendment would prohibit a corporation or labor union from using operating funds, or any other general treasury funds, for federal campaign advertising, regardless of whether or not the advertisement expressly advocates the election of or defeat of a candidate. Such an amendment would negate the Court's decision today, which was based on the premise that corporations and unions have a right to free political speech under the protection of the First Amendment.

Democrats, including President Obama, argue that the Court ruling, in fact, undermines regular citizens' right to free speech by empowering rich corporations to drown out other voices in a political debate.

"The Supreme Court's ruling strikes at the very core of democracy in the United States by inflating the speech rights of large, faceless corporations to the same level of hard-working, every day Americans," Boswell said in a statement announcing his amendment. "The Court's elevation of corporate speech inevitably overpowers the speech and interests of human citizens who do not have the coffers to speak as loudly."

Boswell pointed out the corporations can already fund political action committees and make personal donations to campaigns. That is enough, he said.

"No American should have to turn on the TV and see AIG telling them how to vote," Boswell said.

Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wisc.), who co-sponsored the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law that was largely overruled today, promised new legislation to address the ruling, the Hill reports.

"The American people will pay dearly for this decision when, more than ever, their voices are drowned out by corporate spending in our federal elections," the Wisconsin Democrat said. "In the coming weeks, I will work with my colleagues to pass legislation restoring as many of the critical restraints on corporate control of our elections as possible."

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) also said he would like to see legislation that addresses the ruling passed in time to affect the 2010 midterm elections, Politico reports. As head of the Senate Rules Committee, Schumer said he will hold hearings on the impact of the court decision within a couple of weeks, the Hill reports.

[AndyA]

1. Get with it, folks.

And don't try to be bipartisan about it. (It won't work. I promise.)

[frazzled]

2. We could also all just cancel our cable tv and turn off the radio ...

and let them sink their millions into ads that nobody will ever watch or hear. Sort of like putting your fingers in your ears and going "nyah, nyah, nyah, I can't hear you!"

I know, I know. We'll never get people to do that: they need their football games and American Idol. And then we'd just have all the stupid people hearing the ads, which would be even worse.

But I am not holding my breath for a Constitutional amendment. You know how many years those things take to get ratified, if ever? I mean, get it started ... but anyone who thinks that 2/3 of the Senate and 2/3 of the House, and then 3/4 of all the states are going to go for this is, um, definitely a cockeyed optimist.

[dhpgetsit]

3. Conservativess ought to be up in arms about this too.

This should be a bipartisan issue. Conservatives are just as upset as we are about our representatives turning a deaf ear on us voters.

But for the most part there are only 2 kinds of Conservatives: the Cons and the Conned. The Cons are cool with Fascism, and the Conned are too dumb to see it when it's staring them in the face.

There are a few like George Will who I suspect will be uncomfortable with the SCOTUS decision. We'll see.

[doc03]

5. No they aren't, they see a Republican majority forever

Now is the time for the Teabaggers to come out and show they are not just Republicans.

[w4rma]

10. That's not what they'll get, whether or not they're too propagandized to know it. (nt)

[doc03]

4. I just heard John McCain on CNN he doesn't

appear to be one bit upset about this, it will benefit Republicans it's a guarantee we will lose the Congress this fall forever. The only way to put a stop to this is to take to streets and the Union leadership better get their head out of their ass and call a general strike like they should have after Reagan fired the air traffic controllers.

[ibegurpard]

6. Make it happen

push it through NOW.

[Hugabear]

7. Won't the SCOTUS just strike those down as well?

They don't seem like they have any interest in curbing the corporations' power.

[dgibby]

8. It would appear that this present crop of Dems couldn't pass

gas without blowing all two of their collective brain cells out, so how the hell are they going to pass this? And really, why would they want to cut off their own unlimited corporate campaign funds?

[LostInAnomie]

9. While we're at it...

... why not just make an amendment fixing the maximum political donation to $1?

The more money is removed from politics the better.