As you probably have heard, the U.S. Supreme Court made a decision that grants large corporations - including corporations from foreign countries - a nearly unlimited ability to use massive amounts of money to directly control our election process - handing massive power to the very corporate special interests that caused the economic meltdown that we are struggling to lift our nation out of today.
This decision is hugely damaging to our democracy. The founders of our country recognized that the free-flow of news, opinions and information among the people is vital to a fully functioning democracy. That is why they specifically wrote, right into our Constitution, protection of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and other rights for all people in our country. They knew that you can only have government by, of and for the people when average, everyday people can freely share and receive news, opinions and information from other average, everyday people. On the other hand, when powerful interests hold all the rights to control the flow of news, opinions and information, they control society.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has, over the years, been distorting the first of our basic Constitutional rights - freedom of speech - to grant interests with large amounts of money at their disposal the unfettered ability to use this wealth to control public discussion about elections and the decisions our elected officials are making - undermining the very protection for average, everyday people that freedom of speech is supposed to ensure. They did this by saying that the money that someone might spend communicating their opinion has the same constitutional protection as the opinion itself. In other words, they essentially declared that money is speech and that spending money to influence elections and government decisions has the same constitutional protection as words coming from your mouth or words that you write in an e-mail.
The Supreme Court roundly ignored the fact that they took freedom of speech, which is supposed to be a right held equally by all, and distorted it into a privilege that you get more of the more money you have and less of the less money you have. And with the ability to buy more "speech", those who control large amounts of money can and do exercise so much control over the flow of news, opinions and information that they are able to effective squeeze out the news, opinions and information coming from average, everyday people. And this makes the fears of the founders of our nation come true.
The worst aspect of the fact that the Supreme Court is has extended, to moneyed interests, a constitutional right to control the control the flow of news, opinions and information is that, even if average, everyday people can get their elected officials to approve laws limiting the influence of money in politics, the Supreme Court will strike those laws down as "unconstitutional".
What the Supreme Court did in the most recent decision is to strip away one of the last, great protections for everyday people in our national campaign financing laws - the one that said that corporations are not allowed to directly spend to influence elections. Even with this protection, big money special interests were still very powerful. But this decision will open the floodgates to special interest money and increase their dominance over the elections that are supposed to belong to we, the people.
There are solutions to this, and Connecticut is already in the lead in finding them. Our Citizen Election System allows people to run for state office free of special interest money. It is a good solution, and Congress and every state should approve similar legislation. It, too, has been under challenge in the courts, but I am working right now to adjust it enough so that it will continue maintaining our democracy.
I am also proposing legislation to directly deal with challenges created by the "Citizens United" decision. This legislation, the Saving Democracy Act, would:
If you use Facebook, feel free to visit the online group in support of the Saving Democracy Act.
This is a challenging time in many different ways, and the challenge going on right now against our democracy is one of the most important. For the good of our country, and its future, I hope democracy will prevail.
This decision is hugely damaging to our democracy. The founders of our country recognized that the free-flow of news, opinions and information among the people is vital to a fully functioning democracy. That is why they specifically wrote, right into our Constitution, protection of freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and other rights for all people in our country. They knew that you can only have government by, of and for the people when average, everyday people can freely share and receive news, opinions and information from other average, everyday people. On the other hand, when powerful interests hold all the rights to control the flow of news, opinions and information, they control society.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Supreme Court has, over the years, been distorting the first of our basic Constitutional rights - freedom of speech - to grant interests with large amounts of money at their disposal the unfettered ability to use this wealth to control public discussion about elections and the decisions our elected officials are making - undermining the very protection for average, everyday people that freedom of speech is supposed to ensure. They did this by saying that the money that someone might spend communicating their opinion has the same constitutional protection as the opinion itself. In other words, they essentially declared that money is speech and that spending money to influence elections and government decisions has the same constitutional protection as words coming from your mouth or words that you write in an e-mail.
The Supreme Court roundly ignored the fact that they took freedom of speech, which is supposed to be a right held equally by all, and distorted it into a privilege that you get more of the more money you have and less of the less money you have. And with the ability to buy more "speech", those who control large amounts of money can and do exercise so much control over the flow of news, opinions and information that they are able to effective squeeze out the news, opinions and information coming from average, everyday people. And this makes the fears of the founders of our nation come true.
The worst aspect of the fact that the Supreme Court is has extended, to moneyed interests, a constitutional right to control the control the flow of news, opinions and information is that, even if average, everyday people can get their elected officials to approve laws limiting the influence of money in politics, the Supreme Court will strike those laws down as "unconstitutional".
What the Supreme Court did in the most recent decision is to strip away one of the last, great protections for everyday people in our national campaign financing laws - the one that said that corporations are not allowed to directly spend to influence elections. Even with this protection, big money special interests were still very powerful. But this decision will open the floodgates to special interest money and increase their dominance over the elections that are supposed to belong to we, the people.
There are solutions to this, and Connecticut is already in the lead in finding them. Our Citizen Election System allows people to run for state office free of special interest money. It is a good solution, and Congress and every state should approve similar legislation. It, too, has been under challenge in the courts, but I am working right now to adjust it enough so that it will continue maintaining our democracy.
I am also proposing legislation to directly deal with challenges created by the "Citizens United" decision. This legislation, the Saving Democracy Act, would:
- Ban foreign corporations from using their money to influence elections in Connecticut (local, state or federal) - presuming that a corporation is a foreign corporation unless it can certify that at least 80% of its shares are owned by natural persons who reside in the United States (in the case of stock corporations) or that at least 80% of its voting members are natural persons who reside in the United States (in the case of nonstock corporations).
- Ban corporations from using their money to influence elections in Connecticut (local, state or federal) if they - or another corporation that is a part of the same conglomerate - get any benefit from the state - including tax breaks, incentives, public contracts (of the state or municipalities) or recognition in this state as corporations (including as out of state corporations operating in Connecticut).
- Ban any corporation - or another corporation that is a part of the same conglomerate - that has used its corporate money to influence any election in Connecticut (local, state or federal) in the previous twelve months from getting any benefit from the state or any municipality - including tax breaks, incentives, public contracts or recognition in this state as a corporation (including as an out of state corporation operating in Connecticut).
- Ban any corporation from using its money to influence elections in Connecticut (local, state or federal) unless doing so is expressly made a purpose of the corporation in its corporate bylaws - enacted by least a two-thirds vote of its shareholders (in the case of stock corporations) or at least two-thirds of its voting members (in the case of nonstock corporations). In the case of a corporation that is a part of a conglomerate, this two-thirds vote refers to the corporate entity in the conglomerate with the greatest number of shareholders.
- Ban political spending in Connecticut by any corporation - or another corporation that is a part of the same conglomerate - that employs or contracts with any state or federal lobbyists.
- Require that any corporation using its money to influence elections or public policy in Connecticut (state or federal) disclose it to the State Elections Enforcement Commission.
If you use Facebook, feel free to visit the online group in support of the Saving Democracy Act.
This is a challenging time in many different ways, and the challenge going on right now against our democracy is one of the most important. For the good of our country, and its future, I hope democracy will prevail.
