We the Corporations

By Ariel Schwalb

On September 11th, a House and Senate amendment (SJ. Res. 19 and HJ. Res. 119) failed in Congress that had the potential to help end political corruption in the United States’ election campaign system for good. It was nicknamed the “Democracy for All Amendment” by supporters and would have set a cap on the unlimited amount of money the top 1% and tax-exempt for-profit organizations can currently spend on election ads, which have heavily influenced politics since the Supreme Court ruling of the Citizens United v. FEC (O’Keefe). In the ruling of 2010, the court stated that infinite financial contributions to actual election campaigns can theoretically lead to political corruption, but that infinite spending by outside organizations or individuals on election advertisements cannot (Prokop). Democracy for All was intended to overturn this ruling and reduce the leverage of billionaires like the Koch Brothers, who have donated millions so far to influence policy (O’Keefe). The Koch Industries are landowners of tar sands in Alberta, Canada. This dirty oil may get shipped through the Keystone XL Pipeline, which Columbia University professor James Hansen refers to as “game over for climate” due to the level of greenhouse gas emissions it will let into the atmosphere. The Amendment came close to passing but was unsuccessful. It needed 60 votes in the senate and received 54. Every Republican blocked the vote, arguing that it was an assault on free speech. Many were surprised to see the bill survive the initial GOP filibuster before the vote. Democrats believed it was a strong attempt to rid the system of “dark money,” or unlimited amounts of money that are poured into the Super PACs to put corporate power over people power. They believe the ruling on Citizens United undermines our democratic principles because it allows for special interests to impact policy more than the average person ever could (Everett). Though the bill failed in the afternoon, it helped spark conversation nationwide about the fairness of the political system and shed light the issue of how much money can indirectly be spent on politicians and who or what can make those colossal donations. Hopefully, there will be another opportunity for our stagnant and disagreeable members of Congress to reconsider this issue at a later point in time.

Sources: Everett, Burgess. “Senate blocks campaign finance amendment.” Politico. 12 Sept 2014. Web. 13 Sept 2014. O’Keefe, George. “Defeat of Campaign Finance Amendment especially bruising for Bernie Sanders.” Washington Post. 11 Sept 2014. Web. 13 Sept 2014. Prokop, Andrew. “The Senate just rejected a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United.” Vox. 11 Sept 2014. Web. 13 Sept. 2014.