START A PETITION 25,136,189 members: the world's largest community for good
START A PETITION
x

Senators Introduce Consitutional Amendment to Overturn Citizens United


US Politics & Gov't  (tags: Supreme Court, Citizens United, Overturn, elections, democrats, politics )

Barbara
- 1055 days ago - chicagoist.com
Seven Democratic Senators, including Illinois' Dick Durbin, Tom Udall, New Mexico, introduced a constitutional amendment that would overturn the Citizens United decision. Supreme Court decision gave corporations ability to spend $ on campaigns anonymously



Select names from your address book   |   Help
   

We hate spam. We do not sell or share the email addresses you provide.

Comments

Barbara W. (342)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 6:03 pm
This is a step in the right direction but "We" the people must make certain this effort goes far enough and does not became a band aid on this most abusive decision. The language in the Bill must not be open to interpretation or this effort goes out the door.. All of US must read whatever is proposed to be added to this bill. As soon as I get some info on the language, proposals I will share, please, you all do the same..
 

Barbara W. (342)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 6:12 pm
Tom Udall's website http://tomudall.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=968
 

Barbara W. (342)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 6:20 pm
"Audit the Federal Reserve"
Petition to the US Congress http://www.chooseliberty.org/auditfed4mhc.aspx?pid=007a&gclid=CMWmouikmawCFZJS7AodV29-IQ
 

Susanne R. (249)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 7:14 pm
The Citizens United ruling was WRONG and it should be overturned. Supreme Court Justices aren't always unbiased in their decisions, and this is one of those decisions. I congratulate the seven Senators for taking this brave and bold initiative, and I hope that other members of Congress join them in their efforts to nullify this gift to some of the most corrupt, greedy and environmentally-irresponsible people in this country --the 1%!
 

Jelica R. (157)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 7:18 pm
Good. They should have acted 2 years ago, when this case was at Supreme Court, but "better late than never". I believe that Democrat's blood-bath in mid-term elections and Occupy movements have provided enough momentum to pass this amendment.
 

Sue H. (7)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 7:29 pm
It's about time. Put some muscle in it Dems, stand up for our country.
 

Sharon Karson (82)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 7:51 pm
I am glad to hear that someone is doing something. Money is not speech and corporations should not be considered people when it comes to elections. Our democracy should not be for sale. The citizens united ruling gave all corporations (not just US corporations) a free pass to spend unlimited funds to influence our elections. Lets hope we can push it through.
 

William K. (328)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 8:12 pm
Pass it! We must work our activist asses off to make sure that this gets passed!!!
 

Myron Scott (70)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 9:24 pm
It will take a lot of citizen pressure to get this bill through Congress and a lot more to get the necessary number of states to approve it. Something important, I think, to occupy our time. Thanks for the link Barbara W. I'll check it out.
 

Myron Scott (70)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 9:30 pm
Read the text. Looks good to me.
 

Barbara W. (342)
Wednesday November 2, 2011, 10:08 pm
text: http://www.scribd.com/doc/71154073/A-Constitutional-Amendment-to-Reform-Campaign-Finance

Does not go far enough..Because this is to be a constitutional amendment the language, overall abuse in the "Citizens United" ruling, is crucial since "We" won't get another chance at it.
 

LeMoyn Salmonsen (90)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 2:19 am
I can’t tell you how proud I was to be my wife’s husband and a New Mexican yesterday.

Our junior Senator Tom Udall stepped up to the plate opposing Citizens United. Maybe, just maybe all the calls, emails and letters we’ve been forwarded to his offices these past 2 years, along with thousands of other New Mexicans, helped nudge him out of the dugout. It’s the first step on a very long journey ahead, but a step that needed some guts to take.

I can report here; my wife Savannah was in attendance, along with her go everywhere protest sign, at Occupy Oakland General Strike yesterday afternoon and evening. Being a flight attendant for Southwest, home based out of Oakland and scheduled to go to work today, she left our house at 7 AM MT yesterday in uniform with her sign, I painted for the “We are WI” rallies earlier this year, in a garbage bag, to report a day early for work. She and a friend were in downtown Oakland by midday staying until about 8 PM PT, when she was due to check in with her supervisor at the airport crew lounge.

She called a couple of times during the day and filed very excited reports of meeting lots of nice people, the good weather, the crowds energetic atmosphere, the good food, the great music and recording lots of photos. Being a Caribbean girl the reports were more akin to getting reports from Carnival Parade route back home then a protest march. That’s my wife, the gods love her. We were disappointed to learn, on her return to the lounge, she had failed to pack her cameras USB cable, so I have to wait to see the photos. Bummer.

The thing that struck her most was not the rally as much as the reactions of the TSA personal and the people in the both airports, ABQ and OAK. In ABQ everybody, people she has known and worked around for years, gave her “atta girls” pep cheers and lots of thumbs ups. When she went though security in Oakland, on her return, (there were few passengers checking in because of the late hour) she reported a dozen or more TSA agents, including supervisors, gathered around her, as she stood there without shoes she had not gotten to them before she was surrounded. They were all asking questions about what went on, why people were protesting, striking and shutting down the Port. So she ended up giving an impromptu Q and A and a brief talk, in bare feet on a cold floor and holding her sign which one of the agents handed to her, not her shoes just her sigh, regarding the issues of the 99% and what it means to be a Citizen in a democracy. (Civics 101)

I would have loved to have been there to see it, because she can get a teeny whinny bit impatient with people who generally don’t pay attention to what’s going on in there own communities let alone the world with a tendency toward apathetic. I just know it was a hoot and none of those agents will ever forget her and what she said. They may not agree, but they will never be able to forget.
We are OWS.
 

Shirley S. (174)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 2:25 am
noted
 

Bob P. (427)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 5:56 am
thanks for the info
 

John Gregoire (255)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 6:04 am
This will take forever to get the needed state ratifications but is the only way to go to get around an activist judiciary.
 

Kymberli Ward (25)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 6:08 am
Finally. I've felt for a long time that "we, the people" don't really exist outside the beltway.
 

Kip Mapes (28)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 6:22 am
Good Thank you
 

Barbara D. (70)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 9:57 am
Finally, someone standing up for us citizens. God bless 'em.
 

Roger Skinner (14)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 11:47 am
Unfortunately, I doubt it will get passed as it makes too much sense for the Republicans to support it.
 

Yvonne White (232)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 3:36 pm
About time! I guess Sen. Durbin finally got my memo!;)
 

Barbara W. (342)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 3:40 pm
Will Udall's Constitutional Amendment Overturn Citizens United?

http://www.care2.com/news/member/101960974/3007942
 

Barbara W. (342)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 4:11 pm
Wealthiest Politicians in U.S. Congress

http://business.ezinemark.com/wealthiest-politicians-in-us-congress-773662474ea4.html
 

Barbara W. (342)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 4:18 pm
"Assume Nothing! Question Everything!"

It hurts not to question and then, if need be, question again because after the bills, constitution amendments, are signed into law it's too late. We have an over abundance of laws on the books, many useless and or seriously open to interpretation, good for attorneys not so, for the person on the losing end.. Which in this case, could be the 99%.
 

Barbara W. (342)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 4:50 pm
Here is the Amendment language;

MCG11359 S.L.C.
112TH CONGRESS 1ST SESSION
S. J. RES. ll

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
llllllllll

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico (for himself, Mr. BENNET, Mr. HARKIN, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. MERKLEY, and Mr. WHITEHOUSE) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on llllllllll

JOINT RESOLUTION

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the UnitedStates relating to contributions and expenditures in-tended to affect elections.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years after the date of its submission by the Congress: 82 MCG11359 S.L.C.

‘‘ARTICLE —

‘‘SECTION 1. Congress shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind equivalents with respect to Federal elections, including through setting limits on —

‘‘(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office; and ‘‘(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

‘‘SECTION 2. A State shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind equivalents with respect to State elections, including through setting limits on —

‘‘(1) the amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State office; and ‘‘(2) the amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

‘‘SECTION 3. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.’’.
 

Barbara W. (342)
Thursday November 3, 2011, 4:56 pm
I would like to hear Alan Grayson's take on this constitutional amendment. He's someone who is smart and I believe trust worthy..
http://www.congressmanwithguts.com/?track=fbad

Grayson on the financial industry.. http://www.congressmanwithguts.com/media/video/category/14
 

Cynthia Davis (340)
Friday November 4, 2011, 3:25 am
Well it's about time, but our do nothing Congress will not pass it.
 

Jelica R. (157)
Sunday November 6, 2011, 11:48 am
Representatives will do all it takes to keep their seat. You might call your Reps on all levels and promise to vote for the opponent if she/he does not vote for the amendment.

Now, it would not hurt if USA can get publicly financed election campaigns. I've seen some articles about it, but not law proposal yet. Spread the idea, it might sound fine for citizens.
 

Alison Baker (25)
Monday November 28, 2011, 11:36 pm
Totally proud to sign this petition!

http://petition.reversecitizensunited.com/p/dia/action/public/?action_KEY=5007&tag=rcu_schumer_e2f
 
Or, log in with your
Facebook account:
Please add your comment: (plain text only please. Allowable HTML: <a>)

Track Comments: Notify me with a personal message when other people comment on this story


Loading Noted By...Please Wait

 

 
Content and comments expressed here are the opinions of Care2 users and not necessarily that of Care2.com or its affiliates.