Senate Dems Intro Constitutional Amendment To Combat Campaign Financing

In the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission case of 2010, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment prohibited the censorship of political broadcasts when funded by unions or corporations. 

On Tuesday, Sens. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) and Michael Bennett (D-Colo.) introduced a constitutional amendment that would give Congress the authority to regulate that practice. 

“[We] refuse to stand by idly and watch our elections be fundamentally degraded by the flood of corporate and special interest money,” Udall said. “Campaigns should be about the best ideas not the biggest checkbooks. It’s time to put elections back in the hands of American voters.”

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), a co-sponsor of the amendment, argued that the problem with campaign financing did not originate with the Citizens United case, but rather is rooted in the Buckley v Valeo case of 1976. The 1976 decision set limits on campaign contributions but ruled that spending money to influence elections was a form of speech protected by the First Amendment.

“Buckley v. Valeo was one of the worst decisions the Supreme Court has rendered in the past 100 years,” Schumer said. “Then, making matters worse, cam Citizens United - Buckley on steroids - which really took the First Amendment to an illogical, almost anti-democratic extreme.” 

The constitutional amendment the gang of Democrats introduced authorizes Congress to regulate and limit the amount of money raised and spent on federal campaigns, including independent expenditures. It would also extend this authority to the states.  

“Time and again I have chided my colleagues who would amend the Constitution every other day,” Sen. Dick Durbin (D-Ill.) said. “But i think this one gets to the heart of our future as a nation and the heart of whether or not congressional reform can actually take place.”