news

This week, Congressman Paul Tonko (NY-20) co-introduced the Democracy for All Amendment with United States Representatives Ted Deutch (FL-21), Donna Edwards (MD-4), and Jim McGovern (MA-2). H.J. Res 119 is the House companion to S.J. Res 19, the constitutional amendment slated for a historic vote in the United States Senate this year. The Democracy is for All Constitutional Amendment will reverse highly controversial Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC, which have given corporations and the nations’ wealthiest individuals the right to buy unlimited influence in our elections.

“We should be a government of the many, not the money. Plain and simple. Recent flawed decisions by the Supreme Court have laid the groundwork for more money in politics for those who can afford it and less power for the middle-class and those struggling to enter it. Citizens United and McCutcheon have handicapped our democracy, and this amendment would put a stop to that,” said Tonko.

Since the 2010 Citizens United decision, Americans have witnessed an unprecedented explosion of big money in state and federal elections. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, outside spending tripled between 2008 and 2012, and 93 percent of the more than $600 million spent in 2012 by Super PACs came from about 3,300 donors, or .0011 percent of the American population. 

“At a time when Americans of every political persuasion want big money out of our elections, the Democracy for All Amendment will restore their authority to pass laws protecting the integrity of our electoral process,” Tonko continued.“By reversing Citizens United and related cases, this amendment will advance the basic principle of one voice, one vote that is so integral to our democracy.”

Beyond the explosion of outside spending invited by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United, this decision also dramatically undermined the legitimacy of all campaign finance laws. In his far-reaching opinion for the 5-4 majority, Justice Kennedy held that any election law that goes beyond preventing quid pro quo, bribery-style corruption between candidates and donors risks violating the First Amendment. Unfortunately, in 2014 the Supreme Court only further embraced this narrow understanding of corruption in McCutcheon v. FEC when it invalidated aggregate limits on how much a single donor could spend per election cycle.  Writing for the 5-4 majority, Chief Justice Roberts even went so far as to argue that the influence awarded to donors is not a corrupting quid pro quo transaction, but a First Amendment right.

Sponsored in the U.S. Senate by Senator Tom Udall (D-NM), S. J. Res. 19 was amended and passed out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on July 10, 2014. The provisions within the Democracy for All Amendment are the product of months of collaboration between the House and Senate sponsors of previously proposed constitutional amendments, constitutional scholars, and grassroots advocacy organizations committed to restoring the integrity of our electoral process.  In addition to overturning recent rulings like Citizens United and McCutcheon, the Democracy is for All Amendment also reverses the Supreme Court’s controversial holding in Buckley v. Valeo that spending money in elections is a form of speech protected by the First Amendment.

# # #