Discussion: Reid Pushes Constitutional Amendment To Limit Money In Politics

TPM Article Topics
1

Discussion for article #222773

2

Having lots and lots of money should not entitle you to vastly more political speech than those who don’t.

5 Likes
3

But leave Sheldon Adelson aloooone!

3 Likes
4

Hooray! Someone in Washington is doing work instead of just talking.

3 Likes
5

The amendment could be very simple: “Money is not speech covered by the 1st amendment.” I’d like to see added: “Corporations are not people.”

9 Likes
6

…because Constitutional ammendments are soooooo easy to push through, right? Jeezus.

1 Like
7

Yes, hearings. Let’s get some expert testimony based on the outcome of the Supreme Court’s decision. Let’s also get a full airing of what the Koch brothers have been doing through their many front organizations. And do it in a way that will get people’s attention.

4 Likes
8

Actually it is simplier than that. Just the insertion of the world “natural” before the word person in, I believe, the 18 amendment. That will take care of the “corporations are people” fallacy. They may have to explicitly pass something to take care of control over campaign contributions as well.

1 Like
9

It is the only solution. We cannot not do this because it is hard.

2 Likes
10

That really doesn’t matter because it’s not the point.

1 Like
11

Reid is right, the Democratic Party overwhelming fundraising machine needs to be curbed. This election period alone Democrats have raised about $93 millions more than Republicans and this “who has more money has more freedom of speech” must end.

12

This is the proposed amendment.

‘‘ARTICLE—
‘‘SECTION 1. To advance the fundamental principle of political equality for all, and to protect the integrity of the legislative and electoral processes, Congress shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to Federal elections, including through setting limits on—
‘‘(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office; and
‘‘(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

‘‘SECTION 2. To advance the fundamental principle of political equality for all, and to protect the integrity of the legislative and electoral processes, each State shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in-kind equivalents with respect to State elections, including through setting limits on—
‘‘(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State office; and
‘‘(2) the amount of funds that may be spent by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

‘‘SECTION 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress the power to abridge the freedom of the press.

‘‘SECTION 4. Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.’’.

2 Likes
13

Glad to have your support. Don’t forget to tell your friends, if you have any.

2 Likes
14

I’m with ya’ Harry IF you’re willing to gore your own ox.

There should be no such thing as a private political contribution. ALL campaigns should be publicly funded. You get X dollars at a designated starting time for the campaign, and when your of money, your out.

This amendment should establish this ideal - No private or corporate political contributions & and publicly funded campaigns

3 Likes
15

This proposed amendment goes nowhere near far enough. I want public funded campaigns. That’s where this discussion needs to go.

Our representatives spend most of their time in office raising money for themselves. How 'bout we take that burden away from them so they have time to actually get something done?

This proposal only codifies the old broken system.

2 Likes
16

Yet even this small step will be a monumental task.

1 Like
17

poor repugs, maybe you should dig a little deeper.

18

Perhaps changing the first amendment to read…
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of human beings peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

19

Despite your attempt to school me, I really do understand the point. This is the sort of ploy that right wingers use all the time when they don’t like something. It allows them to be on the right side of the issue without actually doing anything.

20

That’s great! Thanks for supporting an amendment.
Now, are you wlling to follow us to whre we need to go, abandon your own large contributors and advocate for public campaign funding?