The 28th Amendment?........Interview with U.S. Rep. Donna Edwards

from YES! Magazine:



....(snip)....

Sarah van Gelder: What is your objection to the Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United?

Donna Edwards: I think it upends about 100 years of settled law dealing with corporate expenditures for campaigns. I think that it's a dangerous precedent.

Under current law, a corporation has the ability to set up a political action committee (PAC) and solicit directly for it and then to spend on campaigns. What this changes is the ability of corporations to reach directly into their own treasuries, and spend unlimited amounts for the election or defeat of a candidate.

I think it sets up a circumstance where the voices that we'll hear in a campaign will be coming from corporations, and you'll go, "Where are the people?" I think it's dangerous for democracy.

Sarah: Can you give me some specific examples of things you think will be different in this coming election as a result of this ruling?

Donna: Already we've been able to see it. The Chamber of Commerce, for instance, is soliciting directly from corporate treasuries, saying that they're going to make independent expenditures to the tune of about $60 million during this election cycle. That's an extraordinary amount of money. When you combine that with other business groups and you look at the amount of money involved, it's potentially more than either of the party committees are going to spend. I think that this drowns out the voice of ordinary people, and it's a dangerous road to go down.

Sarah: Are there specific issues that you think are particularly going to be affected by the unleashing of corporate spending in terms of what is doable in Congress?

Donna: The Chamber has already talked about going at members who voted, in their view, the wrong way on health care reform—that is for health care. Right now, we are in a hot debate over financial regulation. I think there's a potential that institutions affected in the financial sector could reach into their deep pockets as well, to spend out of their treasuries. It's too early to know if they will do this directly, that is, Corporation X saying, "I'm going to put my brand name out there to spend on a campaign." But they'll do it through these sort of tertiary entities, like the Chamber or other organization front groups.

I think that, given the Court's ruling—and I've read it a number of times—there are a very limited number of legislative actions that would be acceptable to the Court and pass constitutional scrutiny. Which is why I introduced House Resolution 74. ..............(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.yesmagazine.org/issues/water-solutions/interview-with-donna-edwards