Senator Coons Urges Action to Rein in Spending on Campaigns

Press Release

U.S. Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.), a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, spoke at a Judiciary hearing Tuesday about the corrosive effects of unrestricted spending on our political system and the need for congressional action to restore protections against corruption.

Tuesday's hearing examined S.J. Res. 19, a constitutional amendment cosponsored by Senator Coons and crafted in response to Supreme Court rulings that have drastically expanded the role of money in politics, including Citizens United v. FEC and, earlier this year, FEC v. McCutcheon. S.J. Res. 19 would overturn the Supreme Court's ruling in Citizens United and restore the authority to regulate campaign finance to Congress, individual states, and the American people.

"The recent Supreme Court majority opinions seem singularly focused on whether a specific person or corporation's intended giving constitutes quid pro quo corruption while failing to consider other forms of corruption that are corrosive of our political order, that undermine public confidence, and that distract the deliberative workings of legislative bodies at all levels," Senator Coons said.

He continued, "The cumulative impact of money, particularly, secret money, and big money on politics, I think, is very negative. We need to work in a bipartisan way, to find a responsible solution to this challenge. If you look at the trajectory of recent decisions, I think we are just one or two decisions away from the removal of all limitations whatsoever."

North Carolina State Senator Floyd McKissick, Jr. testified before the committee Tuesday about the flood of outside political spending unleashed by Citizens United and its impact on North Carolina voters and elections.

"When you have a centrist state with voters that are centrist in perspective, and you can see this massive amount of spending that's in some situations three, four, five times the amount of money that individual candidates can put toward an issue or their campaigns, you see distorted outcomes," McKissick said. "Distorted outcomes across the board."

Asked by Senator Coons about the Constitutional grounds for extending free speech rights to corporations, American University law professor Jamie Raskin said recent rulings have distorted the intended purpose of the First Amendment, which was meant to protect individual speech and self-expression.

"I think everybody would agree, or should agree, that money is not speech," Raskin said. "Money can be a courier of speech. It can amplify speech. But precisely because the first amendment right is an individual right and not a collective right, that's why the Supreme Court had always said, up until Citizens United, that corporations as artificial entities chartered by the state governments do not have the First Amendment rights of the people."

Senator Coons spoke on the Senate floor in May about the growing influence of big spending on our political system.

Source