Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Promises by 2020 Democrats mean nothing without a constitutional amendment

Opinion

Promises by 2020 Democrats mean nothing without a constitutional amendment

"Adding a free and fair elections amendment to the Constitution will ensure that special interests can no longer drown out the voices of the American people," argues Rena Goldman.

zimmytws/iStock via Getty Images

Goldman is the communications director of Wolf-PAC, a group fighting to amend the Constitution to permit more regulation of campaign finance.

The top three Democratic presidential candidates have each released plans to enact campaign finance reform, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Proposed changes include new laws, the restructuring of the Federal Election Commission, and the overhaul of federal election rules to eliminate the influence of corporations and wealthy donors — something the vast majority of Americans want.

And, while it's something Americans want, it's not what Americans will get.


First, most of these changes have one thing in common: They can easily be overturned, eliminated or revised. Laws and policies often change with election cycles. For example, take the McCain-Feingold law. Signed in 2002, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act was a victory for campaign finance reform — banning soft money, linking campaign contribution limits to inflation, creating disclosure requirements and requiring candidates to stand by their political ads by stating their approval at the beginning or end of the message. It wasn't long before court cases began to strip the law. In 2007, Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC opened the doors for more union and corporate money spent in elections. The next year, the so-called millionaire's amendment in McCain-Feingold was ruled unconstitutional.

Second, we're relying on the politicians who benefit from the current, corrupt system to change it. They have little incentive to do so, and tremendous incentive not to. This creates a dilemma: Either the proposed changes aren't designed to solve the problem fully, or a majority of politicians will never pass and implement them.

Adding a free and fair elections amendment to the Constitution will ensure that special interests can no longer drown out the voices of the American people. A constitutional amendment would provide a lasting solution because it goes above the Supreme Court and can't be easily repealed. To date, the only amendment to be repealed was the 18th Amendment, which mandated a nationwide prohibition of alcohol.

There are two ways to propose a Constitutional amendment, as described in Article V of the Constitution: when two-thirds of each house in Congress votes in favor of a proposed amendment or when two-thirds of the states (34 states) call for a convention to propose the amendment. However the amendment is proposed, it must still be approved (ratified) by the states. Ratification requires a vote in support of the amendment from three-quarters of the states (currently 38), which means that to become part of the Constitution, an amendment must have overwhelming support from the American people.

Throughout history, Americans have regularly amended the Constitution in order to address important issues facing the country. Amendments to abolish slavery and expand voting rights in federal elections for all citizens, regardless of race, gender, or age (18 and older) are two examples of how ordinary Americans banded together to create desired change.

Campaign finance reform is the most important issue of our time as it is the root cause of a federal government that's no longer responsive to the people. It demands no less than a Constitutional amendment.

Read More

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’
Independent Voter News

Princeton Gerrymandering Project Gives California Prop 50 an ‘F’

The special election for California Prop 50 wraps up November 4 and recent polling shows the odds strongly favor its passage. The measure suspends the state’s independent congressional map for a legislative gerrymander that Princeton grades as one of the worst in the nation.

The Princeton Gerrymandering Project developed a “Redistricting Report Card” that takes metrics of partisan and racial performance data in all 50 states and converts it into a grade for partisan fairness, competitiveness, and geographic features.

Keep ReadingShow less
"Vote Here" sign

America’s political system is broken — but ranked choice voting and proportional representation could fix it.

Stephen Maturen/Getty Images

Election Reform Turns Down the Temperature of Our Politics

Politics isn’t working for most Americans. Our government can’t keep the lights on. The cost of living continues to rise. Our nation is reeling from recent acts of political violence.

79% of voters say the U.S. is in a political crisis, and 64% say our political system is too divided to solve the nation’s problems.

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. President Barack Obama speaking on the phone in the Oval Office.

U.S. President Barack Obama talks President Barack Obama talks with President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan during a phone call from the Oval Office on November 2, 2009 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, The White House

‘Obama, You're 15 Years Too Late!’

The mid-decade redistricting fight continues, while the word “hypocrisy” has become increasingly common in the media.

The origin of mid-decade redistricting dates back to the early history of the United States. However, its resurgence and legal acceptance primarily stem from the Texas redistricting effort in 2003, a controversial move by the Republican Party to redraw the state's congressional districts, and the 2006 U.S. Supreme Court decision in League of United Latin American Citizens v. Perry. This decision, which confirmed that mid-decade redistricting is not prohibited by federal law, was a significant turning point in the acceptance of this practice.

Keep ReadingShow less
Hand of a person casting a ballot at a polling station during voting.

Gerrymandering silences communities and distorts elections. Proportional representation offers a proven path to fairer maps and real democracy.

Getty Images, bizoo_n

Gerrymandering Today, Gerrymandering Tomorrow, Gerrymandering Forever

In 1963, Alabama Governor George Wallace declared, "Segregation now, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever." (Watch the video of his speech.) As a politically aware high school senior, I was shocked by the venom and anger in his voice—the open, defiant embrace of systematic disenfranchisement, so different from the quieter racism I knew growing up outside Boston.

Today, watching politicians openly rig elections, I feel that same disbelief—especially seeing Republican leaders embrace that same systematic approach: gerrymandering now, gerrymandering tomorrow, gerrymandering forever.

Keep ReadingShow less