Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
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A constitutional amendment would provide a lasting solution because it goes above the Supreme Court and can't be easily repealed.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

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
Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

A voter registration drive in Corpus Christi, Texas, on Oct. 5, 2024. The deadline to register to vote for Texas' March 3 primary election is Feb. 2, 2026. Changes to USPS policies may affect whether a voter registration application is processed on time if it's not postmarked by the deadline.

Gabriel Cárdenas for Votebeat

Postal Service Changes Mean Texas Voters Shouldn’t Wait To Mail Voter Registrations and Ballots

Texans seeking to register to vote or cast a ballot by mail may not want to wait until the last minute, thanks to new guidance from the U.S. Postal Service.

The USPS last month advised that it may not postmark a piece of mail on the same day that it takes possession of it. Postmarks are applied once mail reaches a processing facility, it said, which may not be the same day it’s dropped in a mailbox, for example.

Keep ReadingShow less
Post office trucks parked in a lot.

Changes to USPS postmarking, ranked choice voting fights, costly runoffs, and gerrymandering reveal growing cracks in U.S. election systems.

Photo by Sam LaRussa on Unsplash.

2026 Will See an Increase in Rejected Mail-In Ballots - Here's Why

While the media has kept people’s focus on the Epstein files, Venezuela, or a potential invasion of Greenland, the United States Postal Service adopted a new rule that will have a broad impact on Americans – especially in an election year in which millions of people will vote by mail.

The rule went into effect on Christmas Eve and has largely flown under the radar, with the exception of some local coverage, a report from PBS News, and Independent Voter News. It states that items mailed through USPS will no longer be postmarked on the day it is received.

Keep ReadingShow less
People voting at voting booths.

A little-known interstate compact could change how the U.S. elects presidents by 2028, replacing the Electoral College with the national popular vote.

Getty Images, VIEW press

The Quiet Campaign That Could Rewrite the 2028 Election

Most Americans are unaware, but a quiet campaign in states across the country is moving toward one of the biggest changes in presidential elections since the nation was founded.

A movement called the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact (NPVIC) is happening mostly out of public view and could soon change how the United States picks its president, possibly as early as 2028.

Keep ReadingShow less