SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
For Immediate Release
April, 01 2021, 12:00am EDT
Contact:
Email:,press@repairourdemocracy.org
Four Reasons Dropping Campaign Finance Reform From S. 1 Is A Dumb Idea
WASHINGTON
As The New York Times reported earlier this week, there's a coordinated smear campaign against the For the People Act that has led some to call for congressional Democrats to "break off a narrower bill dealing strictly with protecting voting rights to prevent [it] from collapsing amid divisions over other issues."
However, dozens of campaign finance experts, voting rights advocates, and grassroots organizations have rightly "locked arms" to warn Senate Democrats against breaking up the bill in order to pass a more narrow version that includes only the voting rights reforms.
Here's four reasons why the bill should be enacted as a whole:
1. Campaign Finance Reform Is Extremely Popular With Voters
The For the People Act is deeply popular with the American people, with polling consistently showing that large majorities of Democrats, Republicans, and Independents support Congress passing the bill.
When it comes to key provisions in the bill like reforming our broken campaign finance system, a memo from the End Citizens United / Let America Vote Action Fund found near unanimous support for policies within the bill that would limit the influence of money in politics:
- 94 percent support making nearly all political contributions fully transparent
- 93 percent support providing more transparency into lobbyist fundraising
- 92 percent support prohibiting political candidates from benefiting from unlimited secret corporate money to boost their campaigns
The same memo shows that more than two-in-three voters--68 percent--would be more likely to vote for candidates that support the For the People Act.
Senate Democrats should not break up the bill to exclude popular provisions supported by a large majority of voters.
2. 49 Democratic and Independent Senators Have Already Co-Sponsored the Entire For the People Act With Voting Rights and Campaign Finance Reform
As the For the People Act makes its way through the Senate, 49 Senate Democrats and Independents have already announced their support for the bill and co-sponsored the vital legislation.
Like Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer told The New York Times, "With 49 co-sponsors of this bill, it's not a situation where one should be negotiating against themselves to satisfy the desires of opponents. We strongly support adopting this bill as whole, enacting it as whole and getting it signed into law as whole."
3. Sen. Joe Manchin Has Embraced Campaign Finance Reform, Indicating That Stripping the Provision Wouldn't Help Get His Vote
Just last week, Senator Manchin (D-WV)--the only Democratic senator yet to co-sponsor the bill--pledged his support for provisions of the For the People Act that would get big money out of our elections, saying "Now, more and more lawmakers spend their time dialing for dollars, instead of legislating for their constituents. This never-ending battle to raise money to spend on reelection campaigns cheapens our elections to nothing more than financial transactions. That is why I have and will continually support changing our campaign finance rules."
Senate Democrats should not abandon campaign finance reforms backed by Manchin and the 49 cosponsors of S. 1.
4. No Evidence Exists That GOP Senators Would Be More Likely to Support S. 1 If It Exclusively Focuses On Voting Rights
Last month, professor and author Lawrence Lessig penned an op-ed in The Washington Post warning Democrats against breaking up the bill, writing "it is a mistake to believe that going smaller would make it easier."
Let's face the facts: The For the People Act is very unlikely to garner even one Republican vote, let alone the 10 GOP Senators needed to break a legislative filibuster.
Senate Democrats should not break up a bill supported by voters of all political parties to appease Republican lawmakers who will never vote for it.
Repair Our Democracy, a project of Democracy 21, is focused on defending the For the People Act against bad-faith attacks and outright lies.
LATEST NEWS
'This Guy Is Toxic': Susan Crawford Defeats World's Richest Man Elon Musk in Wisconsin
"As a result of your strong grassroots organizing, you have defeated the wealthiest person on earth," said Sen. Bernie Sanders to the state's voters after the Supreme Court race was called. "You have set an example for the rest of the country."
Apr 01, 2025
The battle over a seat on the Wisconsin Supreme Court was settled decisively on Tuesday night as the Democratic favorite Susan Crawford dispatched with far-right favorite Brad Schimel, a candidate backed by tens of millions of dollars in outside money and corporate interests, including an estimated $20 million or more from President Donald Trump sycophant and world's wealthiest individual Elon Musk.
As of this writing, Crawford, a Dane County Judge, was enjoying "an unexpectedly easy" win with 55.5% of the vote compared to the 44.5% received by Schimel, the state's former Republican attorney general. Numerous decision desks called the race in her favor shortly after polls closed, and the returns were clear.
"Thank you," Crawford said in a victory speech from the city of Madison shortly after 9:30 pm local time. "Alright, Wisconsin—we did it!"
Crawford said she had just received a concession phone call from Schimel—describing him as "gracious" in defeat—as she thanked the people of Wisconsin for delivering a hard-fought victory in what has been documented as the "most expensive judicial race ever" in U.S. history.
"Tonight, the grassroots have risen up to defeat Musk and the MAGA authoritarianism he's funding."
"Thank you for trusting me to serve you on the Wisconsin Supreme Court," she told the audience of supporters and national television cameras. "I'm so grateful to have earned the trust and support of voters across this great state." She explained that she got into this race—like how she had spent her life—"to do what's right, to protect the rights and fundamental freedoms of all Wisconites."
Crediting her career success to the values learned in the small Wisconsin town of Chippewa Falls—"where people watched out for each other" and people respected the ability to "tell right from wrong"—Crawford said that growing up she never imagined she would ultimately "be taking on the richest man in the world" in a political fight that has gained national attention and was widely seen as a political referendum on the first two months of the Trump administration's policies.
The battle, she said, was "over justice in Wisconsin—and we won!"
Musk has become a key factor in the race over recent weeks by spending millions of his own money backing Schimel. One gimmick he used over the recent weekend was handing out $1 million checks to people, according to critics, to purchase their support and vote.
Progressive lawmakers were among those chiming in with applause Tuesday night.
"Elon Musk spent MILLIONS to defeat Susan Crawford in Wisconsin—and it was an epic fail," declared Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) after announcing her victory. "Voters saw through his schemes, and our country is better off for it. Thank you, Wisconsinites."
Joseph Geevarghese, executive director of the progressive advocacy group Our Revolution, was among those celebrating Crawford's win as an apparent rebuke to Musk and President Trump.
"Despite pouring over $20 million into this race—including handing out million-dollar checks to voters—the world's wealthiest man has failed to secure a conservative majority on the Wisconsin Supreme Court," said Geevarghese. "Crawford's victory is a decisive win for protecting abortion access and workers' rights in Wisconsin. It also serves as a crucial safeguard against Donald Trump's ongoing attempts to subvert American democracy and erode judicial independence."
While the resounding defeat of Schimel by voters will be "viewed as a critical referendum on Trump and Musk’s dangerous, lawless agenda," he added, the amount of money spent during the race "also stands as a stark warning about the deep corruption within our broken campaign finance system. With spending exceeding $100 million, this election has become the most expensive state Supreme Court race in U.S. history, with billionaire donations flooding in on both sides."
"Tonight, the grassroots have risen up to defeat Musk and the MAGA authoritarianism he's funding," Geevarghese said. "But the fight to eliminate dark money from our political system is far from over. Continued inaction poses an urgent, looming threat to our democracy and way of life."
American Bridge, a research and rapid response group with close ties to the Democratic Party, feasted on Schimel's loss by deriding the GOP favorite as the "biggest loser in Wisconsin history."
"Wisconsinites have spoken, and together their votes decided that Wisconsin needs leaders who will protect our freedoms while rejecting the politics of fear and division."
Schimel, said the group's spokesperson Monica Venzke, "clearly can’t take a hint, but hopefully this time it sticks—Wisconsin wants nothing to do with him. Not even his out-of-state billionaire supporter could buy him this one. Imagine spending over $18 million and still losing."
According to Venzke, the defeat of Schimel despite the tens of millions spent by corporate forces "is just a preview of how voters are rejecting Trump's agenda of folding to billionaires. Republicans around the country have a choice: stand up to Trump, or lose."
Lucy Ripp, communications director for Better Wisconsin Together, which represents progressives' concerns in the state, also credited the work of the state's grassroots, which she suggested was a model for people nationwide.
"Wisconsinites have spoken, and together their votes decided that Wisconsin needs leaders who will protect our freedoms while rejecting the politics of fear and division," said Ripp. "Wisconsin voters chose common sense, progress, and freedom over a radical, right-wing partisan agenda that thrives on dividing our communities and leaving working families behind in service of billionaires and special interests."
"By maintaining a strong progressive majority, the Wisconsin Supreme Court will continue as a first line of defense in protecting Wisconsinites' constitutional rights and freedoms," added Ripp, "and a vital check on the Trump and Musk agenda amid the barrage of threats to our rights and livelihoods coming down from the White House."
As of this writing, neither Trump nor Musk had acknowledged Crawford's victory over Schimel on their main social media channels—though each celebrated the approval of a controversial and "regressive" voter I.D. law in the state. To some critics, their twin silence on the Supreme Court race felt like quite a loud statement.
Keep ReadingShow Less
'Absolutely Shameful': Critics Slam Latest Law Firm to Cave Amid Trump's Revenge Threats
Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP—where former Vice President Kamala Harris' husband is a partner—investigated the Capitol insurrection and successfully represented Georgia election workers defamed by Rudy Giuliani.
Apr 01, 2025
In the latest capitulation to his retributive attacks on Big Law, U.S. President Donald Trump on Tuesday announced that his administration struck a deal with a law firm that took part in the investigation into the January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection and whose partners include the husband of former Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris.
"Willkie Farr & Gallagher LLP proactively reached out to President Trump and his Administration, offering their decisive commitment to ending the Weaponization of the Justice System and the Legal Profession," Trump said on his Truth Social network. "The President is delivering on his promises of eradicating Partisan Lawfare in America, and restoring Liberty and Justice FOR ALL."
According to Trump, Willkie—whose partners include former Second Gentleman Doug Emhoff—will provide a total of at least $100 million in pro bono services to veterans, active duty U.S.en troops, and Gold Star families; law enforcement and first responders; to "ensuring fairness in our justice system;" and combating antisemitism.
The firm also agreed to commit to "merit-based hiring" and refrain from "illegal" diversity, equity, and inclusion hiring, promotion, and retention. It must also "not deny representation to clients, such as members of politically disenfranchised groups... who have not historically received legal representation from major national law firms... because of the personal political views of individual lawyers."
Willkie said in a statement that "we reached an agreement with President Trump and his administration on matters of great importance to our firm. The substance of that agreement is consistent with our firm's views on access to legal representation by clients, including pro bono clients, our commitment to complying with the law as it relates to our employment practices, and our history of working with clients across a wide spectrum of political viewpoints."
"The firm looks forward to having a constructive relationship with the Trump administration, and remains committed to serving the needs of our clients, our employees, and the communities of which we are a part," the statement added.
The agreement averts what could have been a ruinous executive order from Trump targeting the firm. Willkie drew Trump's ire for actions including employing a top investigator for the House committee that examined his role in fomenting the attack on the U.S. Capitol and for representing two Georgia election workers who sued his former attorney and adviser, Rudy Giuliani, for defamation. In December 2023, the former New York City mayor was ordered to pay $148 million to the workers for falsely accusing them of engaging in a nonexistent conspiracy to "steal" the 2020 U.S. presidential election from Trump.
According toThe Associated Press, "Emhoff made it known internally that he disagreed with this deal and told firm leadership they should fight, according to a person familiar with the situation who insisted on anonymity to discuss internal deliberations."
Tuesday's deal outraged democracy defenders.
Absolutely shameful. Doug Emhoff of all people should understand the danger that will come from lawyers capitulating to a man hell-bent on destroying our democracy. Emhoff and other partners need to show they stand on the side of the rule of law by quitting—there’s absolutely no other option.
[image or embed]
— Molly Coleman ( @mollycoleman.bsky.social) April 1, 2025 at 2:19 PM
"Emhoff and other partners need to show they stand on the side of the rule of law by quitting—there's absolutely no other option," argued Molly Coleman, executive director of the People's Parity Project and PPP Action and a St. Paul, Minnesota City Council candidate.
The Willkie agreement follows
similar surrenders by white-shoe law firms including Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP and Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Trump accused these and other law firms of weaponizing the judicial system, and last month, he issued a memo directing U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi to "seek sanctions" against firms and lawyers that the administration says have engaged in "frivolous, unreasonable, and vexatious litigation against the United States."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Dems Wouldn't 'Ignore' Parliamentarian to Raise Minimum Wage, But GOP Plans to for Massive Tax Giveaway to the Rich
"They are deciding that the way we're gonna do this is break the Senate and make up our own rules," said Sen. Cory Booker.
Apr 01, 2025
During 2021 battles to raise the minimum wage and advance the Build Back Better agenda, congressional Democrats refused to "ignore" the unelected U.S. Senate parliamentarian—but Republican lawmakers are now planning to do just that, so they can give the wealthy trillions of more dollars in tax cuts, at the expense of programs that serve working people.
GOP Senate leadership and the White House want to make permanent tax cuts that President Donald Trumpsigned into law in 2017, "without having to account for how much it would add to the deficit," Axiosreported Tuesday. "Now, they're saying all they need is for Budget Chair Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) to decide that's what they're going to do."
"Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) backed the argument, laid out by Graham, that Republicans don't need the Senate parliamentarian to bless the current policy approach during Tuesday's Senate GOP lunch," Axios detailed. "Graham is expected to release the language of the budget resolution as soon as Tuesday, according to GOP Whip John Barrasso (R-Wyo.)."
As a trio of experts at the Center for American Progress—including economist Lawrence Summers—wrote Tuesday: "The majority is attempting to force the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) and the Joint Committee on Taxation (JCT) to say the fiscal impact is instead zero dollars by using a 'current policy' baseline rather than the 'current law' baseline that is defined in statute. This approach is unprecedented in the 50 years since the CBO was formed and Congress acted within the current budget framework."
"Whether one believes the United States should be cutting taxes or increasing spending, there should be no question that forcing the CBO and JCT to pretend that policies have no fiscal impact would allow Congress to make major tax and spending decisions with no arithmetic recognition of the cost," they argued. "This would be the epitome of fiscal irresponsibility. Congress needs to responsibly bring down deficits. Establishing principles that make it possible to incur huge costs without recognizing them would be an egregious and dangerous error."
Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.)—who has faced calls to resign from his leadership post after caving to congressional Republicans during last month's shutdown fight—spoke out against the plan on Tuesday, as NBC Newsreported.
"That would be going nuclear," Schumer said. "And it shows that Republicans are so hell-bent on giving these tax breaks to the billionaires that they're willing to break any rules, norms, and things they promised they wouldn't do."
While Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) was in the midst of holding the chamber's floor in remarks that began Monday night and were ongoing as of press time, to protest Trump's sweeping attacks on government, Schumer also informed him of the GOP plan.
Booker read in full a Center on Budget and Policy Priorities report from February titled, House Republican Budget's $4.5 Trillion Tax Cut Doubles Down on Costly Failures of 2017 Tax Law, as well as recent reporting in The New York Times about what the newspaper called "a maneuver so wonky that it might be best explained with sports cars and anime streaming."
"They found a way around the parliamentarian. They found a way around the rules of the Senate. They found a way around the ideals of reconciliation," Booker said of congressional Republicans. "They are deciding that the way we're gonna do this is break the Senate and make up our own rules. This is how they're gonna get a bill through that gives trillions [of] dollars of tax cuts to the wealthiest in our country who are doing very well."
While refusing to "hate on" wealthy Americans, Booker also had a message for them: "You don't need tax cuts, especially not that are gonna be given to you on the backs of the poor, on the backs of our elders, on the backs of our children, on the backs of expectant mothers, on the backs of my mom's, your mom's Social Security."
Booker's historic stunt—which set a new record for the longest Senate floor speech in history—came as polls show Democratic voters are frustrated with the party's failure to effectively stand up to Trump and fight for working people.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular