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
super pacs
To Hand Power 'Back to the People,' House Dems Propose Amendment to Reverse Citizens United
"In every election cycle since the disastrous Citizens United decision, we have seen more and more special interest dark money poured into campaigns across the country," said Rep. Pramila Jayapal.
Feb 13, 2025
With the impact of the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision in theCitizens United case becoming clearer by the day as billionaire megadonor Elon Musk spearheads the reshaping of the federal government, Congresswoman Pramila Jayapal on Thursday led more than two dozen Democratic lawmakers in introducing a constitutional amendment that would reverse the pivotal ruling.
The Washington Democrat has introduced the We the People Amendment in previous years, but she noted that this year she is proposing the measure after "a billionaire [paid] millions to buy a seat as Shadow President," referring to the more than $270 million Musk spent on President Donald Trump's campaign last year—an effort that promptly made him $170 billion richer and has resulted in new government contracts for his companies and his leadership of the so-called Department of Government Efficiency( DOGE).
"Corporations are not people and money is not speech," said Jayapal. "In every election cycle since the disastrous Citizens United decision, we have seen more and more special interest dark money poured into campaigns across the country... My We the People Amendment hands power back to the people by finally ending corporate constitutional rights, reversing Citizens United, and ensuring that our democracy is truly of the people, by the people, and for the people—not corporations."
The ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission struck down long-held rules on corporate "independent" spending that doesn't go directly to a candidate or political party, eliminating restrictions for money that flows to campaigns through super political action committees (PACs) which purport to be separate from candidates.
The We the People Amendment—which is not supported by any Republican lawmakers—would specify that constitutional rights apply to people, not corporations, "and that artificial entities have no constitutional rights," said Jayapal's office.
It would also mandate that federal, state, and local governments require public disclosure of all political contributions and expenditures.
As Brendan Fischer wrote at Rolling Stone last month, Musk's "astonishing influence over Trump and the Republican Party is not merely a function of his wealth, his celebrity, or his ownership of the social media platform X (formerly Twitter). It is attributable to his pouring of at least $277 million into super PACs last year, which purchased enormous influence."
Cole Bennett, legislative co-director of the advocacy group Move to Amend, applauded Jayapal's understanding "that the changes she and many of her colleagues support to advance healthcare, expand economic justice, ensure a livable world, and promote real democracy are incredibly difficult but necessary."
"This is especially true given the unjustifiable Supreme Court decisions declaring corporations as entities with many of the same constitutional rights as human persons and that money spent in elections is equivalent to First Amendment-protected free speech," said Bennett. "The exponential growth of corporate power and corrupting political influence from huge sums of money flooding elections can only be solved with a systemic solution that is equivalent in scale to these systemic problems—the We the People Amendment, which will end all corporate constitutional rights and money as free speech."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Sunrise Launches 'People, Not Billionaires' Pledge for DNC Chair Candidates
"The influence of corporate money in the Democratic Party is undermining Democrats' ability to win elections," said one organizer.
Jan 14, 2025
As Democratic National Committee members prepare to vote on the next party chair in February, leading progressive advocacy groups on Tuesday launched an open letter to candidates to warn that Democratic leaders "must decisively show that the party is for the people—not billionaires or corporations."
To do that, said the Sunrise Movement and several allied organizations, the winning candidate must pledge to revive the Obama-era ban on corporate lobbyist donations to the DNC and to ban super PAC spending in Democratic primaries.
The groups, which also include Gen-Z for Change, Justice Democrats, and the Green New Deal Network, are calling on candidates to sign the "People, Not Billionaires" pledge.
The committee is voting on the new chair on February 1, days after President-elect Donald Trump is set to take office and three months after the Democratic Party suffered devastating losses in the federal elections.
"The influence of corporate money in the Democratic Party is undermining Democrats' ability to win elections," said Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the Sunrise Movememt. "It's time for the Democratic Party to represent everyday Americans and return power to the people."
As a presidential candidate in 2008, Barack Obama introduced a ban on DNC donations from corporate lobbyists and PACs, promising, "We are going to change how Washington works."
The restriction was rolled back in 2016, angering economic justice and pro-democracy advocates who warned the move was "out of touch with the clear public rejection of the role of political money in Washington," as Democracy 21 founder Fred Wertheimer toldThe Washington Post at the time.
On Tuesday, the Sunrise Movement said reinstating the ban on lobbyist and PAC donations is essential for the Democrats to "decisively show that the party is for the people—not billionaires or corporations."
The pledge reads:
I pledge to build a party that delivers for everyday people and fights to end the corrosive influence of big money in our politics. I will work to ensure that billionaire donors cannot shape the Democratic party or Democratic party primaries.
I will revive President Obama's ban on contributions from corporate lobbyists and PACs to the DNC.
I will use every tool at my disposal to ban SuperPAC spending in Democratic primaries, including: (a) forming and chairing a committee of DNC members to investigate how to end SuperPAC influence in Democratic primaries; (b) I will urge and support state Democratic parties to ban SuperPAC spending over $5,000 in Democratic primaries (c) I will cut ties between the DNC and any donors or consultants that work with those SuperPACs.
With super PACs being "bankrolled by oil CEOs, crypto moguls, and GOP billionaires like Elon Musk," said Sunrise, the wealthiest people and corporations in the country are being given "free rein to buy our elections—and defeat candidates who represent the needs of working people."
Efforts to ban super PAC spending in primaries will ensure that "candidates who represent the voices of working people" have a chance of winning the support of voters, "rather than being undermined" by wealthy groups.
The progressive think tank Data for Progress found in a poll in December that 70% of all voters—and 80% of Democrats—support a ban on super PAC spending in Democratic primaries. Three-quarters of voters said that without such spending, elected officials would be "more responsive to their voters."
"The Democratic Party must be the party of the people—not billionaires or corporations," said Shiney-Ajay. "Young people are organizing for a future where our democracy works for us, not the wealthy few."
Candidates for the DNC chairmanship include Ben Wikler, Wisconsin Democratic Party chair; Ken Martin, chair of the Minnesota Democratic–Farmer–Labor Party; former Maryland Gov. Martin O'Malley; and former presidential candidate Marianne Williamson.
Progressive lawmakers including Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) have spoken out in recent months about corporate and super PAC spending, with Sanders saying in August, "If you're serious about the power of money in politics, you can say today, sorry, no super PACs allowed in primaries."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Musk's Threat to Primary Democrats Sparks Fresh Call for Ban on Super PACs
"If there's ever been a time to discuss serious campaign finance reform, it is now," one advocate said. "We are sliding into a new era of American oligarchy, and unless we take decisive action, the integrity of our democracy is at risk."
Dec 21, 2024
Trump-backer and richest person alive Elon Musk's role in almost forcing a government shutdown this week has revived calls for campaign finance reform, both nationally and within the Democratic Party.
As part of his campaign against a bipartisan continuing resolution (CR) that would have funded the government through March 14, Musk said that Republicans who voted for the bill should lose their seats during the 2026 midterms and that he would fund moderate primary challengers to Democrats in safe districts.
"The threat of limitless super-PAC spending from the world's wealthiest man could have proven enough to shut down the federal government days before Christmas," Joseph Geevarghese, the executive director of Our Revolution, told Common Dreams. "If there's ever been a time to discuss serious campaign finance reform, it is now. We are sliding into a new era of American oligarchy, and unless we take decisive action, the integrity of our democracy is at risk."
"How about the House add campaign finance reform to the CR so Republicans and Democrats alike can stop being so scared about what a billionaire man-child thinks before they vote on anything around here?"
Before the shutdown showdown, Musk was already incredibly influential in politics as a financial backer: He spent at least $277 million on the campaigns of President-elect Donald Trump and other Republicans in 2024, including over $19 million on House races alone. Musk also spoke at Trump campaign rallies and was tapped by the president-elect to co-lead a new Department of Government Efficiency with fellow billionaire VivekRamaswamy.
However, his efforts to sink a spending bill revealed by House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) on Tuesday raised fresh concerns about his influence on elected politicians. His initial barrage of complaints against the CR—posted on his social media site X on Wednesday—precipitated a statement against the bill by Trump and Vice President-elect JD Vance. Johnson never brought the bill up for a vote.
As part of his initial Wednesday tweet storm, Musk wrote, "Any member of the House or Senate who votes for this outrageous spending bill deserves to be voted out in 2 years!"
In response to Musk's threats, Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), the ranking member of the Ways and Means Committee, gave an impassioned speech on the House floor on Thursday.
"Can you image what the next two years are going to be like if every time that Congress works its will and then there's a tweet? Or from an individual who has no official portfolio, who threatens members on the Republican side with a primary and they succumb?" Neal said.
Musk, in response to a video of Neal's speech, tweeted, "Oh… forgot to mention that I'm also going to be funding moderate candidates in heavily Democrat districts, so that the country can get rid of those who don't represent them, like this jackass."
The statement sparked outrage and resistance from congressional Democrats.
"Everyone knows I'm always ready," Neal toldBusiness Insider, while the Democrats on the Ways and Means Committee tweeted out sarcastic memes.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortezcalled for change on social media on Friday, writing, "How about the House add campaign finance reform to the CR so Republicans and Democrats alike can stop being so scared about what a billionaire man-child thinks before they vote on anything around here?"
Ultimately, after another Republican-led spending bill failed to clear the House on Thursday, Johnson introduced a paired-down CR that included key measures backed by Democrats such as relief for disaster victims and aid for farmers. That bill passed the House on Friday and the Senate early Saturday, narrowly averting a government shutdown that would have deprived hundreds of thousands of federal employees of paychecks over the holidays.
But Musk's intervention established a precedent "that should upset every American who believes in our democratic form of government," Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) said.
"Musk is getting carried away with himself, using his limitless fortune and his ownership of X to try to turn American politics to the authoritarian right," former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich wrote on his Substack on Friday.
"Wealth inequality is rapidly undermining our democracy," Reich continued. "Musk is the poster boy for a wealth tax."
Musk's primary challenge to Neal bolstered calls for the Democratic National Committee (DNC) to ban super-PAC spending in its primaries.
"Elon Musk, worth $455 billion, spent $277 million to buy the Republican Party," Sanders staff director Warren Gunnels wrote on social media on Friday. "He has also pledged to replace Democrats in primaries with those who represent his special interests. If the DNC doesn't ban super PACs in primaries, what will this picture look like in 2 years?"
Reich also argued that "the DNC must bar dark money and limit campaign contributions in all Democratic primary campaigns. The incoming chair of the DNC, selected on February 1, should make this a key part of their strategy for the 2026 midterms and beyond."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular