Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

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

Opinion

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

Diverse People At Voting Booth. Vote Here Elections Sign

A political scientist examines how automatic voter registration is quietly turning non-affiliation into America's largest voting bloc.

AndreyPopov/Getty Images

When Neither Party Is the Default: Rethinking Representation As America’s Electorate Changes

For most of my career as a political scientist, representation was the central theme of my teaching and research. Early on, I studied how legislators understood their responsibilities to constituents — whether they saw themselves as delegates carrying out constituent mandates, trustees exercising independent judgment, or politicos combining both. That work asked a question that still matters: What does it mean to represent the public in a changing democracy?

Today I find myself asking a related question: What happens when the electorate changes but the institutions built to represent it do not?

Keep ReadingShow less
A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

A person looks out at the North Tower pool at the 9/11 Memorial and Museum ahead of the 25th anniversary of the attack on the World Trade Center on September 7, 2026, in New York City.

Gary Hershorn/Getty Images

How 9/11’s Memory Continues to Shape American Citizenship

Twenty‑five years after September 11th, the burden of that day continues to affect us in ways that are difficult to express. It was a moment of profound loss, but also one that revealed both the vulnerability and resilience of our national fabric. The memories remain vivid for many of us: where we were, what we felt, and how the world appeared to change in an instant. Even now, a quarter century later, the impact of that morning continues to shape how we understand our country, our responsibilities, and our relationships with one another.

To help us all reflect on that day, I invited four contributors to the Fulcrum to share reflections not to revisit the tragedy, but to commemorate the ways it has persisted in our consciousness twenty-five years later.

Keep ReadingShow less
Close-up shot of a Black woman's hands receiving a mail-in ballot to vote in a USA Presidential, Senatorial, Congressional, or local election

An immigrant's perspective on why America's election debate over security vs. access is a false choice — and how USPS mail ballot rules fit in.

Jeremy Poland/Getty Images

Ballot Security and Voter Access Are Not Opposites: What the USPS Ballot Rule Gets Right

I came to the United States from India in 1982. In Indian elections, I watched officials check voter identity and mark a voter’s finger with indelible ink. Party representatives observed the process. The system was imperfect, as every large democracy is, but it sent a simple message: casting one vote is a serious civic act, and the process should make that clear.

When I later became an American citizen and cast my first ballot, the experience felt very different. A poll worker found my name on a list and handed me a ballot. In my precinct, there was no photo identification check. I was surprised—not because I expected voting to be difficult, but because I expected a system as consequential as an election to have clear, visible safeguards.

Keep ReadingShow less
A group of people wait in line to get their ballots to vote in the election.

Uncontested elections are more common than you'd think. From open primaries to multi-member districts, here's what states like California and Alaska are doing to bring real competition back to the ballot — and what it'll take to change political culture, too.

Getty Images, SDI Productions

What America Can Do About Its Uncontested Elections

Politics nerds have many ideas about how to strengthen American democracy; however, few directly address silent elections. For example, ranked-choice voting does nothing to encourage more candidates to run if there are not enough. Term limits increase turnover, but even newcomers can frequently run uncontested in general elections if they have won competitive primaries.

Fortunately, the cause isn’t hopeless. For one, tightening campaign finance laws would put potential challengers on more even footing with corporate-backed politicians, encouraging more candidates to run. Independent redistricting would also help. The Cook Political Report, a poll aggregator, considers only 69 of America’s 435 House districts competitive. Fair redistricting means more competitive districts and therefore more contested elections.

Keep ReadingShow less