WASHINGTON - Today, U.S. Senator Tom Udall welcomed a pledge by Senate Rules Committee Chairman Charles Schumer to hold a Senate floor vote on Udall's constitutional amendment to reform the nation's broken campaign finance system.
Udall,
an outspoken critic
of the U.S. Supreme Court's controversial Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions, has led the fight in the Senate for
campaign finance reform
. Udall introduced his constitutional amendment,
S.J. Res. 19
, last June to reverse the Court's 1976 Buckley v. Valeo decision, which held that restricting independent campaign expenditures violates the First Amendment right to free speech. Buckley, which essentially equates political money with speech, is the basis for both Citizens United and McCutcheon.
"It's clearer than ever that we need a constitutional amendment to restore integrity in our election system," Udall said. "Our government should be of, by and for the people - not bought and paid for by secret donors and special interests. I'm looking forward to working with Senator Schumer to bring common-sense campaign finance reform to a vote as soon as possible so we can ensure our elections are about the quality of ideas and not the quantity of cash."
VIDEO:
http://youtu.be/InrqSsnPS_c
AUDIO:
http://www.tomudall.senate.gov/files/mp3/CampaignFinanceAudioApril302014.mp3
PHOTO:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/senatortomudall/sets/72157644033879717/
AMENDMENT TEXT: http://www.scribd.com/doc/148408191/Udall-Constitutional-Amendment-on-Campaign-Finance
Specifically, Udall's
amendment
would:
-Authorize Congress to regulate the raising and spending of money for federal political campaigns, including independent expenditures.
-Allow states to regulate such spending at their level.
-Not dictate any specific policies or regulations, but instead allow Congress to pass campaign finance reform legislation that withstands constitutional challenges.
Udall's amendment has 36 cosponsors. More than 15 states and hundreds of local governments across the country
have called on Congress
to take action on campaign finance reform.
Schumer made his promise during a hearing of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration entitled "Dollars and Sense: How Undisclosed Money and Post-McCutcheon Campaign Finance Will Affect 2014 and Beyond."
Udall also attended the hearing to discuss how his amendment would restore fair elections in the wake of the McCutcheon decision, which allows one donor to give to an unlimited number of candidates - up to $3.6 million every two years.
By contrast, Udall said at the hearing, "An American citizen working full-time, making minimum wage, would have to work 239 years to make that kind of money - 239 years. The Court has shown a willingness to strike down sensible regulations by a narrow majority, and is returning our campaign finance system to Watergate-era rules."
"The Court's decision this month in McCutcheon was one more step in dismantling our campaign finance system," Udall continued. "That decision gave (the super-wealthy) a green light - full speed ahead - to donate to an unlimited number of candidates. Now a billionaire in one state gets to influence the elections in 49 other states."
Udall's full opening statement from the hearing follows:
Good morning Chairman King. Thank you for holding this important hearing. I also want to thank our witnesses for being with us today to discuss this extremely important topic.
Justice Stevens, welcome. As the author of the dissent in Citizens United, you wrote that the "Court's ruling threatens to undermine the integrity of elected institutions across the Nation."
I have often found myself agreeing with you. And, unfortunately, this is another of those times. Four years after Citizens United, the damage continues. The Court's decision this month in McCutcheon was one more step in dismantling our campaign finance system.
It is now crystal clear - an amendment to the Constitution is necessary to allow meaningful campaign finance rules.
Most Americans don't have unlimited dollars to spend on elections around the country. They only get their one vote. They can support one candidate - the one who represents their district or state. But for the wealthy, and the super wealthy, McCutcheon says they get so much more. That decision gave them a green light - full speed ahead - to donate to an unlimited number of candidates. Now a billionaire in one state gets to influence the elections in 49 other states.
Under McCutcheon, one donor can dole out $3.6 million every two years. Just like that. Consider this: An American citizen working full-time, making minimum wage, would have to work 239 years to make that kind of money - 239 years.
The Court has shown a willingness to strike down sensible regulations by a narrow majority, and is returning our campaign finance system to Watergate-era rules. The same rules that fostered corruption, outraged voters, and prompted campaign finance standards in the first place.
But our campaign finance system was in trouble long before. The Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions just picked up the pace. The Court laid the groundwork many years ago.
We can go all the way back to 1976 to Buckley v. Valeo. The Court ruled that restricting independent campaign expenditures violates the First Amendment right to free speech. In effect, money and speech are the same thing. This is tortured logic, and it ignores the reality of political campaigns.
The outcome is not surprising. Elections have become more about the quantity of cash and less about the quality of ideas. More about special interests, and less about public service. We have a broken system based on a deeply flawed premise.
That's why I introduced S.J. Res. 19 last June, which now has 35 cosponsors. It's similar to bipartisan resolutions in previous Congresses, and is consistent with the amendment Justice Stevens has proposed.
It would restore the authority of Congress - stripped by the Court - to regulate the raising and spending of money for federal political campaigns. This would include independent expenditures, and it would allow states to do so at their level. It would not dictate any specific policies or regulations. But it would allow Congress to pass sensible campaign finance reform. Reform that withstands constitutional challenges.
In The Federalist paper No. 49, James Madison argued that the U.S. Constitution should be amended only on "great and extraordinary occasions." And I agree with him. I also believe we have reached one of those occasions. Free and fair elections are a founding principle of our democracy. They should not be for sale to the highest bidder.
This effort started decades ago. There is a long - and I might add bipartisan - history here. Many of our predecessors from both parties understood the danger. They knew the corrosive effect money has on our political system. They spent years championing the cause.
In 1983 - the 98th Congress - Senator Ted Stevens introduced an amendment to overturn Buckley. And in every Congress from the 99th to the 108th, Senator Fritz Hollings introduced bipartisan constitutional amendments similar to mine. Senators Schumer and Cochran continued the effort in the 109th Congress.
And that was before the Citizens United and McCutcheon decisions - before things went from bad to worse. The out-of-control spending since Citizens United has further poisoned our elections. But it has also ignited a broad movement to amend the Constitution.
McCutcheon is the latest misguided decision. But it won't be the last. It is time for Congress to take back control and pass a constitutional amendment. Thank you again for holding this hearing. It is very, very timely on the heels of this decision.
