Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Wyoming takes a stand against out-of-control political spending

U.S. Capitol surrounded by money
Greggory DiSalvo/Getty Images

Clements is the president of American Promise, a nonprofit advocate for amending the Constitution to allow more federal and state regulation of money in politics.

On Feb. 13, in the deep red state of Wyoming, a majority of state House members voted for Joint House Resolution 0002, calling on Congress to propose a constitutional amendment to ensure transparency in election spending and allow states to regulate corporate, union and other political contributions.

Wyoming legislators demonstrated again the deep, cross-partisan support for amending the U.S. Constitution to empower Americans to stop the systemic corruption that comes from out-of-control political spending. While the resolution didn’t receive the needed two-thirds vote, the strong majority support (35-26) shows that Wyoming lawmakers, as with most Americans, know the urgency of ending the domination of dark money and outside influence in elections.


Americans oppose out-of-control political spending because it undermines their own rights of free speech and a level playing field in voting and representation. Past Supreme Court decisions – Buckley v. Valeo, reinforced by Citizens United v. FEC – removed power from voters and state and federal lawmakers to set limits on political spending. The theory – unprecedented for 200 years of American history – is that those with massive financial resources have a “free speech” right to deploy those resources, with no limits, to influence election outcomes. Spending in elections by groups, billionaires and even foreign governments has been rising at an alarming rate. Nearly $16 billion may be spent in the 2024 cycle alone, up more than 30 percent from the last presidential election.

The American government is supposed to be of, by and for the people, but our current pay-to-play politics has deteriorated into a government bought, paid and sold to the highest bidder. Social media and advertising disinformation campaigns are funded from the shadows, influencing elections with no accountability. Worse, foreign actors exploit the dark money system to manipulate elections and serve their own interests.

Americans have had it with this dangerous Supreme Court-imposed theory about money and free speech. In Wyoming, recent polling shows that 87 percent of voters agree that the coercive influence of money in politics threatens democracy. The constitutional amendment to enable states and Congress to set reasonable limits to regulate campaign spending is favored by 75 percent of Wyoming voters. These extraordinary super-majorities mirror what American Promise is seeing in polling and ballot initiatives around the country.

Now, Wyoming and others are vying to join the 22 states that have taken formal action to advance the For Our Freedom Amendment, the only enduring way to regulate political spending by giving the states and Congress power to set reasonable limits. In November 2023, 86 percent of Maine’s voters approved a law banning spending in elections by foreign government-controlled entities. Maine’s voters, concerned that unhinged claims of “free speech” rights to unlimited election spending might even extend to foreign actors, showed foresight in including a resolution calling for the constitutional amendment: After the foreign money ban was passed, foreign-owned corporations sued in federal court, claiming a free speech right to dominate Maine’s elections with their money. The For Our Freedom Amendment would put an end to such foolishness.

In Pennsylvania, legislators introduced a bipartisan resolution calling for the constitutional amendment solution. Wisconsinites and Arizonans are organizing to move their state into the victory column, and Minnesotans have an amendment resolution moving through the legislative process. Momentum is building because Americans are tired of having the fate of the country and our communities determined by an elite donor class. But that elite is outnumbered. The fact is, 86 percent of Republicans and Democrats agree that money in politics is a threat. It’s time to act, and that’s exactly what these states are doing.

The vote in Wyoming is part of the tipping point that brings constitutional solutions faster than many realize when the need is clear. This constitutional amendment process is the time-honored way that Americans drive reform in the darkest hours. At the beginning of the 20th century, when division, political violence, gender-restricted voting and white supremacy dominated much of the country, The Washington Post’s editors solemnly sniffed at those proposing constitutional amendments. Over the next several years, Americans ratified four amendments, the first of twelve that Americans would secure in the 20th century.

Now the promise of American democracy is on the line again. As Wyoming just showed, Americans know what to do.

Read More

An oversized ballot box surrounded by people.

Young people worldwide form new parties to reshape politics—yet America’s two-party system blocks them.

Getty Images, J Studios

No Country for Young Politicians—and How To Fix That

In democracies around the world, young people have started new political parties whenever the establishment has sidelined their views or excluded them from policymaking. These parties have sometimes reinvigorated political competition, compelled established parties to take previously neglected issues seriously, or encouraged incumbent leaders to find better ways to include and reach out to young voters.

In Europe, a trio in their twenties started Volt in 2017 as a pan-European response to Brexit, and the party has managed to win seats in the European Parliament and in some national legislatures. In Germany, young people concerned about climate change created Klimaliste, a party committed to limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, as per the Paris Agreement. Although the party hasn’t won seats at the federal level, they have managed to win some municipal elections. In Chile, leaders of the 2011 student protests, who then won seats as independent candidates, created political parties like Revolución Democrática and Convergencia Social to institutionalize their movements. In 2022, one of these former student leaders, Gabriel Boric, became the president of Chile at 36 years old.

Keep ReadingShow less
How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

Demonstrators gather outside of The United States Supreme Court during an oral arguments in Gill v. Whitford to call for an end to partisan gerrymandering on October 3, 2017 in Washington, DC

Getty Images, Olivier Douliery

How To Fix Gerrymandering: A Fair-Share Rule for Congressional Redistricting

The natural progress of things is for liberty to yield, and government to gain ground. ~ Thomas Jefferson, Letter to Col. Edward Carrington, Paris, 27 May 1788

The Problem We Face

The U.S. House of Representatives was designed as the chamber of Congress most directly tethered to the people. Article I of the Constitution mandates that seats be apportioned among the states according to population and that members face election every two years—design features meant to keep representatives responsive to shifting public sentiment. Unlike the Senate, which prioritizes state sovereignty and representation, the House translates raw population counts into political voice: each House district is to contain roughly the same number of residents, ensuring that every citizen’s vote carries comparable weight. In principle, then, the House serves as the nation’s demographic mirror, channeling the diverse preferences of the electorate into lawmaking and acting as a safeguard against unresponsive or oligarchic governance.

Nationally, the mismatch between the overall popular vote and the partisan split in House seats is small, with less than a 1% tilt. But state-level results tell a different story. Take Connecticut: Democrats hold all five seats despite Republicans winning over 40% of the statewide vote. In Oklahoma, the inverse occurs—Republicans control every seat even though Democrats consistently earn around 40% of the vote.

Keep ReadingShow less
Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.
A pile of political buttons sitting on top of a table

Once Again, Politicians Are Choosing Their Voters. It’s Time for Voters To Choose Back.

Once again, politicians are trying to choose their voters to guarantee their own victories before the first ballot is cast.

In the latest round of redistricting wars, Texas Republicans are attempting a rare mid-decade redistricting to boost their advantage ahead of the 2026 midterms, and Democratic governors in California and New York are signaling they’re ready to “fight fire with fire” with their own partisan gerrymanders.

Keep ReadingShow less
Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

Wilson Deschine sits at the "be my voice" voter registration stand at the Navajo Nation annual rodeo, in Window Rock.

Getty Images, David Howells

Stolen Land, Stolen Votes: Native Americans Defending the VRA Protects Us All – and We Should Support Them

On July 24, the Supreme Court temporarily blocked a Circuit Court order in a far-reaching case that could affect the voting rights of all Americans. Native American tribes and individuals filed the case as part of their centuries-old fight for rights in their own land.

The underlying subject of the case confronts racial gerrymandering against America’s first inhabitants, where North Dakota’s 2021 redistricting reduced Native Americans’ chances of electing up to three state representatives to just one. The specific issue that the Supreme Court may consider, if it accepts hearing the case, is whether individuals and associations can seek justice under Section 2 of the Voting Rights Act (VRA). That is because the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals, contradicting other courts, said that individuals do not have standing to bring Section 2 cases.

Keep ReadingShow less