Citizens United VS SCOTUS Inc.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CitizensUnited/message/
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Lessig
Sent: Thursday, February 11, 2010 1:42 PM
Subject: BREAKING: Congress's response to Citizens United
Fix Congress First
--
The Democratic leadership in Congress just announced its response to the
Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United , the case that struck down limits
on independent corporate campaign expenditures.
In a word: hopeless.
The package the Democrats are proposing is filled with ideas that either won't
work or that, if they worked, would only invite the Supreme Court to strike
again. (For a description of the proposed changes and my reactions to them,
click here or scroll to the bottom of this email.)
Congress had a chance to do something real here, but rather than supporting a
bold reform that would make our democracy function better, they failed; they
changed nothing. And as a result, our representatives' dependency on campaign
funders -- the central corrupting force acting on our government -- will
continue for another day.
You know why it happened this way. Members of Congress have every incentive to
preserve a system that keeps them in office by keeping their campaign coffers
full. So the very same funders who've blocked progress on issue after issue for
decades have now conspired to block a reform that would have made those other
reforms possible.
What we need to do is show members of Congress that they're also dependent on
another constituency: the voters. We're following this issue. We know the
difference between fake reform and real reform. And come November, we'll make
our decisions based on who had the courage to stand up to the funders, and who
tried to sell America a bill of goods while protecting the status quo.
The Fair Elections Now Act is the reform we need, and we still have the chance
to push Congress to pass it. So far, 135 Members of the House have signed on as
co-sponsors, but we must continue to urge all of our representatives to support
this crucial bill. You can use our simple tool to email your members of
Congress and tell them that this issue won't fly under the radar in 2010:
http://fixcongressfirst.org/email
If the Democratic Party wants to lead, then they need to show us they're ready
to lead. And if the Republican Party wants to rise back to power, they need to
prove they'd use that power to enact the will of the people.
Please take action today to make real reform possible.
-- Lawrence Lessig
P.S. These are the changes the Democratic leadership proposes, and my view
about each. As you read these, ask yourself: Will this change reform the
fundraising Congress? Will it really make Members of Congress any less
dependent on special interests?
(1) Ban foreign corporations from influencing elections.
This is a fine idea. Problem is that it is completely unclear how under the
Supreme Court's reasoning this change would be constitutional. The Court said
the First Amendment doesn't care who is trying to exercise the right to speak
-- that the First Amendment simply limits the government's power to regulate
speech. So how will it find foreigners have less freedom than corporations?
(2) Stop government contractors or TARP recipients who haven't repaid from
political spending.
This selective regulation is Supreme Court bait: it wasn't imposed on TARP
recipients when they took the money, and my bet is the Court views the
government contractors limitation as too broad.
(3) Impose new disclosure requirements, so that the ultimate funder is exposed.
A perfectly fine regulation, but to what effect? Will the disclosure really
make Members less dependent on the funders?
(4) Impose new disclaimers on TV ads.
Same point as above.
(5) Require candidates to have reasonable access to air time.
This is promising and important, though the Court has signaled increasing
impatience with this sort of regulation. So again, an uncertain reform of
limited effect.
Donate
This email was sent to:
[email protected]
If you wish to remove this e-mail address from future Change Congress e-mails,
please click here .
Read our Privacy Policy | Contact us at [email protected] | Creative
Commons License
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"ShadowGovernment" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/shadowgovernment?hl=en.
