McCutcheon v FEC ruling proves one thing

Yesterday, April 2nd, 2014 – the Supreme Court delivered its ruling in McCutcheon v FEC striking down aggregate limits on campaign donations. Without aggregate limits, any person with enough money may give the maximum allowable donation to every single candidate for office in Congress. Or to every single member in a particular party. Or to every single member of a specific committee or combination of committees. By one account a person could invest $3.5 million into Congress every election cycle. A married couple, double that. The majority’s contention is that none of this could possible make Congress consider the donor’s interests before and above that of other citizens.

Susannah Newman, Coordinator for the NJOCU Coalition had this to say:
“The McCutcheon ruling, on top of the Citizens United ruling, clearly shows that the Court’s majority believes in the rights of the wealthy minority (which includes each of them) over the rest of us. Fair elections are now history. It is obvious, now more than ever, that a Constitutional Amendment is necessary; that people MUST rise up and reclaim their democracy. No congressional candidate should be voted into office this November without going on the record vociferously in support of a Constitutional Amendment to overturn both the Citizens United and the McCutcheon rulings.”

Lawrence Lessig on McCutcheon
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/04/02/originalists-making-it-up-again-mccutcheon-and-corruption.html

Why McCutcheon decision is scarier than Citizens United (Salon)
http://www.salon.com/2014/04/02/scalias_next_disaster

Sen. John McCain blasts the Supreme Court’s decision (Business Insider)
http://www.businessinsider.com/supreme-court-mccutcheon-decision-campaign-contributions-2014-4

Chief Justice Roberts says corruption is no worse than flag burning (Fox News)
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/02/high-court-voids-overall-contribution-limits/

“Probably eventually anonymously” (VIDEO – HuffPost)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/02/mccutcheon-v-fec_n_5076518.html

Blistering Dissent (TPM)
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/dc/liberal-justices-blistering-dissent-mccutcheon

What you need to know (TYT)
http://www.tytnetwork.com/2014/04/03/need-know-mccutcheon-v-fec-ruling/

SCOTUS Blog
http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mccutcheon-v-federal-election-commission/

The Decision (written opinions of Justices)
http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/13pdf/12-536_e1pf.pdf

The Takeway:  Built into this decision is the notion that money is speech and that more money is more speech. Buckley v Valeo, which established the money/speech connection in 1976, did not hold that donations were speech, so this is a significant rejection of precedence. Meanwhile, it’s very hard to understand how amplifying the speech of a small group of people creates more speech in any case.  What the ruling instead proves is that somehow, some way, the American citizenry must demand a constitutional amendment that gracefully allows for campaign finance law.  At NJOCU, while we remain convinced that a purely legislative approach (such as the AACA or Government By the People Act) could significantly improve our democracy, the McCutcheon decision reminds us that the amendment solution must be pressed forward with vigor. Reclaim the People’s Constitution.

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: