Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Meet the reformer: Tiffany Muller, would-be vanquisher of big money

Meet the reformer: Tiffany Muller, would-be vanquisher of big money

Tiffany Muller is the president and executive director of End Citizens United.

End Citizens United

Tiffany Muller is president and executive director of End Citizens United, a left-leaning political action committee working to overhaul and bolster regulation of the federal campaign finance system. Originally from rural Missouri, she began her political career in Kansas before joining the ECU staff in Washington three years ago. Her answers have been lightly edited for clarity and length.

What's the tweet-length description of your organization?


ECU is a grassroots organization dedicated to getting big money out of politics and fixing the rigged system in Washington so that government works for all Americans. We have 4 million members nationwide and are entirely grassroots-funded with an average donation of just $14.

Describe your very first civic engagement.

I began my career in government and politics when I became the first openly gay public official in Kansas as a member of the Topeka City Council in 2004. We passed an ordinance that prevented discrimination based on sexual orientation. That made me the target of Fred Phelps and the Westboro Baptist Church, which sought to repeal it. We fought back and won. I learned a lot from that experience and saw the importance of being an active participant in our democracy, and it led me to where I am today.

What was your biggest professional triumph?

Passage of the For the People Act. It was inspiring to see a wave of reformers run on anti-corruption and getting big money out of politics in 2018. That led to an unprecedented number of candidates rejecting corporate PAC money and it ultimately helped take back the House. It created the political momentum to make a comprehensive reform and anti-corruption bill the first item on the agenda in this Congress. With Speaker Nancy Pelosi's leadership, HR 1 was introduced and passed. We're proud of the fact that we've built an organization that supports these reformers.

And your most disappointing setback?

When Kansas passed the anti-gay marriage amendment in 2005. I lost my election that same day, but that paled in comparison to knowing that our neighbors and communities voted to pass the amendment. At the time, it wasn't clear to me that there was a path to marriage equality. Eight years later, I got married to my wife.

How does your identity influence the way you go about your work?

Being a woman and a lesbian who's leading a large organization is still uncommon. It's inspiring to see more women in leadership roles and elected office. I try to work hard, stay humble and always make time for those who want help. A lot of people helped me get to where I am today, and I want to help open the door for others.

What's the best advice you've ever been given?

Always carve out time for your family. Politics is a demanding environment and time is elusive. I took that advice to heart and make sure that I spend quality time with my wife and daughter every day.

Create a new flavor for Ben & Jerry's.

We always need to bring more attention to the flood of unlimited, undisclosed money in politics, so I'm going to go with "Dark Money Ice Cream." The catch would be we don't have to disclose the ingredients.

The West Wing or Veep?

The West Wing for sure. When I was a researcher on Gov. Kathleen Sebelius' campaign, there were several long nights and The West Wing got me through them.

What's the last thing you do on your phone at night?

Hit the "do not disturb" button.

What is your deepest, darkest secret? (Something fun!)

I absolutely love Chesters Hot Fries. My staff gives me a hard time because I like it so much, but they're so good!


Read More

A person signing a piece of paper with other people around them.

Javon Jackson, center, was able to register to vote following passage of a 2019 Nevada law that restored voting rights to formerly incarcerated individuals.

The Nation Is Missing Millions of Voters Due to Lack of Rights for Former Felons

If you gathered every American with a prison record into one contiguous territory and admitted it to the union, you would create the 12th-largest state. It would be home to at least 7 million to 8 million people and hold a dozen votes in the Electoral College.

In a close presidential race, this hypothetical state of the formerly incarcerated could decide who wins the White House.

Keep ReadingShow less
People standing at voting booths.

The proposed SAVE Act and MEGA Act would require proof of citizenship to register to vote, risking the disenfranchisement of millions of eligible Americans.

Getty Images, EvgeniyShkolenko

The SAVE Act is a Solution in Search of A Problem

The federal government seems to be barreling toward a federal election power grab. Trump's State of the Union address called for the Senate to push through the SAVE Act, which has already passed the House, in the name of so-called "election integrity." And the SAVE Act isn’t the only such bill. Like the SAVE Act, the Make Elections Great Again (MEGA) Act—introduced in the House—would require voters to provide a document outlined in the Act that allegedly proves their U.S. citizenship. We’ve been down this road before in Texas, and spoiler alert: it was unworkable.

Both the SAVE and MEGA Acts would disenfranchise millions of eligible U.S. citizens without making our federal elections more secure. They seek to roll out a faulty federal voter registration system, despite the existing separate registration and voting process for state and local elections. And these Acts target a minuscule “problem”—but would unleash mass voter purges and confusion.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stickers with the words "I Voted Today."

Virginia is on its way to be the 19th jurisdiction to adopt the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, bringing the U.S. closer to electing presidents by the national popular vote.

Getty Images, EyeWolf

Virginia On The Path to Join the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact

NPVIC is an agreement among U.S. states and the District of Columbia to award all their electoral votes to the presidential ticket that wins the overall popular vote in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It is considered a pragmatic, voluntary state-based initiative because it aims to ensure the winner of the national popular vote wins the presidency without requiring a constitutional amendment, operating instead within the existing Electoral College framework by utilizing states' constitutional authority to appoint electors. If enough states join the NPVIC to reach a total of 270 electoral votes, the United States will effectively shift from a winner-take-all (WTA) regime to a national popular vote system for electing the President.

With Virginia's adoption, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact will be adopted by eighteen states and the District of Columbia, collectively holding 222 electoral votes. The compact requires 270 electoral votes (a majority of the 538 total) to take effect. It currently needs forty-eight more electoral votes to become active.

Keep ReadingShow less
With the focus on the voting posters, the people in the background of the photo sign up to vote.

Should the U.S. nationalize elections? A constitutional analysis of federalism, the Elections Clause, and the risks of centralized control over voting systems.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

Why Nationalizing Elections Threatens America’s Federalist Design

The Federalism Question: Why Nationalizing Elections Deserves Skepticism

The renewed push to nationalize American elections, presented as a necessary reform to ensure uniformity and fairness, deserves the same skepticism our founders directed toward concentrated federal power. The proposal, though well-intentioned, misunderstands both the constitutional architecture of our republic and the practical wisdom in decentralized governance.

The Constitutional Framework Matters

The Constitution grants states explicit authority over the "Times, Places and Manner" of holding elections, with Congress retaining only the power to "make or alter such Regulations." This was not an oversight by the framers; it was intentional design. The Tenth Amendment reinforces this principle: powers not delegated to the federal government remain with the states and the people. Advocates for nationalization often cite the Elections Clause as justification, but constitutional permission is not constitutional wisdom.

Keep ReadingShow less