To hand power 'back to the people,' House Dems propose amendment to reverse Citizens United

Instead of throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks, immediately get rid of the gerontocracy (Schumer, Pelosi), regroup, find a leader with some balls and declare open warfare on Republicans. It's not like there isn't any ammunition.
- Exactly, the conservatives have spent the last 40 years gradually doing exactly this and the Democrats have spent the last 40 years denying that reality and laughing off the right wing, talk show type populists while they slowly took control of the GOP and the court system.
- immediately get rid of the gerontocracy (Schumer, Pelosi), regroup, find a leader with some balls and declare open warfare on Republicans.
  to be fair, this is probably exactly what republicans want to be able to pull the entire curtain down.

Way too little, way too late.

Yeah, the sole reason they're suggesting it now is because they know it's too little too late. It will go nowhere and we all know this, them Dems will be like 'oh but we tried!' Fucking useless.
- Read the article.

That would have been useful and a great idea over a decade ago.
Now it's just "let's do this" and nothing will happen. Its too late.
- Yeah even if they did actually repeal it, which they won't, it's really closing the stable door after the horse has bolted at this point IMO.
  Because with the current administration, you can say it's illegal to accept money from so-and-so, and they'll just go "fuck you" and do it anyway and nobody will will stop them or bring consequences, so ... yeah. This is kind of doing time, not talking time.
- I mean... that was literally one of the things that Hillary ran on. So... your timeline checks out.
  
  As we've seen though, a woman cannot win against a racist sexist nazi shitbag in the united states.
  Don't at me (as the young people say), I voted for the woman.
  
  Only at the end to try and court Bernie supporters. Before that she was mostly silent and won the primary with corporate money.

To late, but DO IT!!

This is one of the single biggest changes we can make to our current electoral system.
Should’ve done this in 2021. This could’ve changed the 2024 election entirely.
- What did they do in 2021 instead?
  Probably nothing else going on really. They're just lazy and fat off corporate cash piles, obviously.
  
  Nothing. That’s the problem. Democrats are so afraid to play an opposition party cause it will negatively affect party leadership and top donors. They want the status quo and are more than likely benefiting from the Trump regime in many ways.
  Make no bones about it: top Democrats have been complacent with a hostile takeover of the US government because it is benefiting them.
  Progressive Democrats and party newcomers are seeing this reality. They tried to play the game for a bit but got burned like Bernie did. Some democrats are finally growing a backbone to stand up against geriatric party leadership.
  
  I'm surprised how quickly people forgot the very first bill the Democrats introduced in 2021 addressed this very topic. The Republicans in the senate killed it.
  https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1
  Passed House (03/03/2021) For the People Act of 2021
  "This bill addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government.
  Specifically, the bill expands voter registration (e.g., automatic and same-day registration) and voting access (e.g., vote-by-mail and early voting). It also limits removing voters from voter rolls.
  The bill requires states to establish independent redistricting commissions to carry out congressional redistricting.
  Additionally, the bill sets forth provisions related to election security, including sharing intelligence information with state election officials, supporting states in securing their election systems, developing a national strategy to protect U.S. democratic institutions, establishing in the legislative branch the National Commission to Protect United States Democratic Institutions, and other provisions to improve the cybersecurity of election systems.
  Further, the bill addresses campaign finance, including by expanding the prohibition on campaign spending by foreign nationals, requiring additional disclosure of campaign-related fundraising and spending, requiring additional disclaimers regarding certain political advertising, and establishing an alternative campaign funding system for certain federal offices.
  The bill addresses ethics in all three branches of government, including by requiring a code of conduct for Supreme Court Justices, prohibiting Members of the House from serving on the board of a for-profit entity, and establishing additional conflict-of-interest and ethics provisions for federal employees and the White House.
  The bill requires the President, the Vice President, and certain candidates for those offices to disclose 10 years of tax returns."
- Biden could have arrested Trump on January 21st, and that would have been that
- It should have been done immediately, when the ruling came down in 2010, when the Democrats had a majority in the House and Senate, and Obama was the President.
  I was one year away from graduating college at the time, getting simultaneous bachelor's degrees in Econ and Poli Sci, trying to explain to people how bad the situation was, and how this may be our only shot at fixing it.
  But uh, nope, Obama had already won, the Dems had already swept the House and Senate to near, but not quite super majorities, and most Dem voters were too busy gloating over these victories and pretending that they meant Republicans would never have power over the Federal government again, and actually? you're an asshole for implying Obama and the Dems aren't perfect, in fact you sound racist, get away from me.
  Instead, that was indeed the highwater mark for Dem control in the Federal government (in the last 20 years), and they squandered it, then lost some House and Senate seats, then doomed us all by ratfucking Bernie to run the perfect encapsulation of their sanctimonious and haughty elitism, Hillary, who lost to a rapist, racist, fraudlent fascist.
  cue curb your enthusiasm theme
- There was less than a 0٪ chance that they could have passed a constitutional ammendment in 2021.
  
  I guess we'll never know because they didn't even try.
  But I'm sure they'll have a chance now that they're making a good faith effort! lol.
  
  Love your downvotes. "Nuh uh!! They just didn't want to!"
- I'd argue rank choice is more important.
  If you give people actual elections, it shouldn't matter how much money is spent on campaigns
  All someone needs is $1,000 for a good website. Lower the barrier to let them on the ballot and let people rank them, and you'll solve the problem.
  
  The fact that both parties have been so active in opposing ranked choice voting is proof that it would break their monopolies on power.
  
  I would love ranked choice. It completely flopped on the state ballot in Colorado this past election because both parties are completely against it

Do this and keep doing it until it works. This isn't a moonshot. It's normal, sensible change. Everybody shut your fucking mouths with all this secondary "it isn't going to work now" bitch energy. Get behind the shit you want, loudly.

Good, but why the hell didn’t they do this when they had control of Congress?
- Because they don't want it to pass obviously. When was the last time you went into your bosses office and demanded a pay cut??
  This is just pandering. Maybe one or two of them actually want it but the rest will just pretend to care because they know the genie is never going back in the bottle
- No party has been anywhere near that level of “control” for a very long time.
  
  OK, but trying would have let them know where the weak links are, where to put pressure in the future. Same goes for Dobbs. Even if they failed to secure a federal right to abortion in the legislature, having the voting record would have been a powerful tool to use against DINOs -- "Shape up, or loose your funding"
  That they never even tried means Democrats are just not interested in strategically working towards success.

would have been more useful when you had any kind of power to get a bill passed, but thanks anyway i guess
- Stow that shit. This is exactly what they need to be doing. They need to make the argument to the American people that they have better ideas and a better plan for America, and then create a voting record for Congress so they can beat them in the next election. Of course it won't pass, but if they give up without even trying, then the Nazis can act like they are the only option.
  
  I agree, but i aint gonna stow it. Why didnt they introduce it when they were able to maybe pass it? Im not going to refrain from criticizing them just because worse people are in power.
  
  They should have been submitting this every session since the citizens united decision. Even with no hope of success, they could be forcing every member of Congress to openly declare their loyalty to the oligarchs.
  But, if they did that, then the oligarchs would think they were disloyal.
  
  Agreed, just frustrating that they wait until their corpo donors are done signing checks for a big election year. Would've been a huge game changer years ago when Dems were in control and perhaps would've proven everyday Americans support progressive policies
  
  Their argument to the American people doesn't matter. Millions of Americans are still happy with what's happening and we have a government that will use violence to get what it wants. We need a coalition of countries to step on America's dick and grind it into the ground. We deserve it for the shit we've done around the world.
  
  The people that elected Trump won't care. Trump or someone like him will lie to all of them about anything they attempt to do.
  I'm not saying it's not worth doing this, I'm just saying it won't matter by itself.
  
  Bullshit. They should not be focusing on zero chance gestures while real people are struggling. They choose this BECAUSE it wont pass so they don't have to fight to help people, it's a distraction that not only wont stop fascism, but give it time to deepen its roots while they waste energy on an impossible task.
- A bill can't overturn a SCOTUS ruling on the constitutionality of something. That's why they are proposing an ammendment.
  
  Read the Constitution. Congress can regulate what is subject to judicial review by the Supreme Court. It can also regulate the operation of the Supreme Court.

I hate to say it but proposing a constitutional amendment is just virtue signaling at this point. There isn’t a snowballs chance in hell this passes even with 100% democrat support.
I appreciate the thought and effort but put forth legislation that actually has a chance at passing.
- Virtue signaling is an important act for a minority party. It lets the base know what you stand for and what your opponents stand against. This is something with broad public appeal yet low congressional support (because politicians like monies). It's something you can hit your opponents with and, with a snowball's chance, you might actually make progress in passing.
  "I want to take money out of politics, my opponent is captured by rich billionaires. They don't serve you, they serve the billionaires" It's an ad that writes itself.
  This is something dems should be doing, especially since the last election was them running away from policy and instead doubling down on how much their policy isn't different from the average republican's. We saw how that turned out.
  
  But its a lie… they had the chance to make this a reality, but they honestly don’t care. They can try to appeal to progressives but it’s too late.
  
  Virtue signaling is different than signaling virtues. Here it's referring to halfassing it when they can't actually do anything about it.
- I will never understand what is wrong with virtue signalling. We should all be happy when people feel pressured to publicly state that they stand with good things and against bad things. Plus, it's not like they're lying: if it gets called to vote then they'll all show their colors, and if it doesn't get called to vote then it forces the opponents to show theirs.
  As much as I like to imagine a world where everyone understands politics enough to know Republicans are against removing money from politics, we clearly do not.
- I hate to say it but proposing a constitutional amendment is just virtue signaling at this point
  You mean political theater. "Virtue signaling" is a nonsense term that fascists use.

So they throw this impossible task out there, something they can put all their energy and rhetoric into which will ultimately not bear results in my lifetime, and they can say see I was fighting against this tyranny.
This is such a bald-face transparent PR move I hope everyone sees it for what it is.
- They’ve had multiple chances to fix this when they had real power. They’re idiots.
  
  They’re idiots
  They're idiots, or.. they are insincere.
  The reality that people who vote Democrat loyally, especially white, middle income, NPR listening, card carrying liberals, need to come to terms with is this:
  The Democratic party doesn't work for you.
  The leadership of the Democratic party, it's party managers, the ones who hold real power: they do not share your same interests. It's always been performative. The vast majority of Democrats never meant any of it. The few that do are refused any real leadership or power. Every time they've had the votes to do something, anything, there is always a technical or procedural excuse. And when they now the thing can't pass, they use the opportunity to show their bonafide: precisely when it has no cost. The current political situation were in would be impossible without the weakness and persistent cuckoldry coming from the Democratic party.
  It's a waste of time to invest further in the Democratic party. They were never going to come to your rescue, now less than ever when they are most needed. American leftist already knows this, it's time for the American liberal to develop a sense of shame at their unwillingness to oppose the baseless, performative bullshit they've come to accept as politics from the DNC.
  We need a new political project. The DNC is cooked.
  
  “But they didn’t have a 90 seat advantage in the Senate and 400 house seats and the presidency!!! How do you expect them to get anything done without that?!?” - centrists
  
  Not to defend the spineless Dems or this performative stunt, but it would be pretty difficult to pass at any point. They would need a lot of Republicans to join.
  But I am picking nits. There's no good reason not to push for this while they're in power. If they had thrown their weight behind it in 2023, and forced Republicans to go on the record for CU, we'd probably have President Harris now.
- We just have to admit that the representative democracy system, in its current form, suffers from the same flaws as other systems. It’s done a great job at elevating people a bit, but we hit a new ceiling of how prosperous the average person is.
  I really want the conversations to be more around iterating on representative democracy. In this day and age we should be able to have our voices/votes heard more on each topic.
  I don’t think we’ll ever move on to the next step of human societal development until we stop concentrating power. Us picking a representative in the hopes that they will proxy vote for what we actually want them to vote for does not work.

Do not waste time talking about a non-starter.
You need 290 votes in the House, you have (at most) 215. You need 75 Republicans to flip.
If, miracle of miracle, that happens, it goes to the Senate where you need 60 votes to end a filibuster, you have (at best) 47. You need 13 Republicans breaking rank to end cloture + 7 more to pass it.
Then it goes to the states for ratification, you need 38. In 2024 19 states went to Harris which means you need all of them +19 Trump states.
Yeahhh...
- The thing is, at the very least this forces the Republicans (and for that matter Democrats) to pick a side on the issue.
  Citizens United is extremely unpopular with the Republican base, as it is with the Democrat base. If a Republican voter sees that their Congress person voted to maintain citizens United, they might be upset.
  
  The GOP will just lie and blame everything on "radical leftists". Which don't really exist in the US.
- Ron Paul used to introduce doomed bills like this all the time. It's not expected to pass. It's to reveal the owners of other legislators.
  Even some Democrats will vote against this bill. Every one of those legislators work for the corporations - not for us - and need to be replaced.
  
  Which, ultimately, does nothing as voters have the memory of a goldfish.
- Check the comments, 75% of the people here don't believe the simple fact that the Democrats have not had a supermajority to pass such an amendment since 1979, 30 years before the infamous Citizens United win at the Supreme Court became the current interpretation of law.
  They don't know that the legislation discussed in this post has been brought to vote multiple times by Democrats over the years under different names, and that this is just the latest instance.
  They just want to complain that Democrats 'don't do anything good when they have power, and wont even try when they know they cant win' - handwaving away reality.
  
  They just want to complain that Democrats ‘don’t do anything good when they have power, and wont even try when they know they cant win’ - handwaving away reality.
  it's literally the meme of
  lemmy: "you're not doing anything"
  GOV: "i am literally doing everything"
  lemmy: "you're not doing good enough"
  GOV: "i'm literally the best in my field trying the best i can with good results"
  lemmy: "well it's still not good enough"
  GOV: "find me a better solution then."
  
  So this will pass and we're all wrong?
- this might actually work if this goes through the states in the midterms, might be a little bit too early for that to happen, but i guess we'll have to see. I would entirely expect this to be 100% possible to get passed, it just needs support.
- The biggest issue is that Dems get rich from this shit too. Even if they had a massive majority it wouldn't pass.

Jfc. They and both houses of Congress multiple times since Citizens United and didn't do shit. Bringing it up now, when it won't even get through Congress, let alone the states, is a fucking distraction
- Even then they never had the support to pass this or any constitutional ammendment.
  
  It would have been a great political move though. Make Republicans go on the record as wanting more money in politics. CU is horribly unpopular and they could go on the offense for once...if they wanted to.
  They probably couldn't pass it, but this is the precise sort of fight they could wage to excite their base...if they wanted to.

Absolutely disingenuous to report this as "house Dems", as though the liberal (i.e. conservative) Dems are in on it. They are not. These are progressive Dems who propose this basically every year, and who are actually fighting for us, not corporations and profits. Liberal Dems then work with their Republican friends to shut it down. This is why liberal Dems are as much the enemy as the Republicans.

Wow so brave. \s \s \s
Seriously tho. These people are phony AF. They had 4 years to actually do this. This is just political theater.
- I mean, they had 14 years didn't they?
  Have they ever tried to pass an ammendment for this?
- Can't expect much from them when they owe thier position to corporations to. It's been a dog and pony show for a long time.

Now they ask for this? After having zero majority in either house? Acter letting a nazi waltz into the white house?
- The Democrats have a long history of waiting until Republicans hold a majority in both houses to propose milquetoast change.
  Keeps their name in the papers without actually having to do anything.
  
  The Democrats have a long history of waiting until Republicans hold a majority in both houses to propose milquetoast change.
  Every time. Legalizing weed? Only when Republicans control. Making abortion federally protected? Only Republican control. Raising the minimum wage? Only when Republicans control.
  When they are in office? Never one of those, but pushing for bills that get everyone in congress paid more by their handlers called lobbyists.

Where was this a decade ago?
- Because there's no chance in hell that this will pass under a Republican majority.
  
  Get them on the fucking record. Keep introducing it and have it dominate news cycles. The biggest sense of optimistism I had during the Harris campaign was her specifically calling for a reform of corporate personhood.

Would have been a lot cooler if Biden did this as a executive action. But you know spinless Democrats and all that...
- But that would have upset the capital class and Biden is a proud capitalist so he would never put democracy before profits. Liberal Democrats only ever do things when they know that they don't have to worry about it actually happening.
  
  Couldn't have said it better myself. Thanks for expanding on this.
- How would an executive action make this work? Can you explain that?
  
  It would not. And they can not.
  
  Same way Donny changed the name of the Gulf of Mexico

finally something actually based, this would be such a good amendment.

It is with a sense of similar urgency that I am proposing an amendment to make every Thursday a national holiday.
Like the Democrats, I also do not have any power to enact this, let alone enforce it, but the important part is that I proposed something impossible instead of actually doing literally anything to stop this.
- Yup more useless posturing.
- Well shit . what's your act blue link?

Long overdue, and probably too late.
- True. I really wish they would focus on things they can actually do as the minority. Like, this is performative, but I'm not even sure for who it's supposed to be performative. Do dems honestly think there's even a single voter out there with the attitude of "well I wasn't going to vote next year, but after seeing dems moonshot yet another dead-on-arrival amendment about a 15-year old court ruling I'm on board!"
  Look at what republicans were able to accomplish on the level of school boards, counties, churches, state houses, election commissions, etc while they were out of power and steal their playbook for goodness sake 😒
  
  But if they didnt we would complain why arent they trying. At least someone is trying.

Wouldn’t it be nice if they did shit like this when they were actually in power?
- It would fail the vote either way, as a constitutional amendment requires a supermajority vote - and there has not been a supermajority in the Senate since 1979. Which was the last time the Democrats successfully put through an amendment, before anyone further complains they do nothing with power when they get it.
  Depending on how jaded you are this is either a stunt, or the particular (left-leaning?) Democrats involved in tabling the legislation are trying to raise the issue their constituents have asked them to. Either way it'll force the Republicans to show their hand and all vote against it.
  
  Yeah it would have forced the republicans to show their hamd back when democrats did control most of the government too Maybe a bit more trying things that would 'force the republicans to show their hand' would have been useful when something actually could have been done about it. Everyone knows the republicans fucking hand now.
  
  Obama had a supermajority in 2008.

Yes. Suture up that corpse.
- Yep, now that it's far too late and the damage is done and they don't have a majority.

Do the people in these comment sections not grasp how Constitutional amendments work?
It requires two thirds of the Senate. Which Democrats have not had in the past half century.
That is why Democrats didn't try it when they had a majority. Because it would not work.
People really just want an excuse to blame Democrats for everything.
- It's far more complicated than that to get an amendment passed including a route that doesn't require Congress.
  Second, there is value in trying things that will fail. It sends a signal to the citizenry that this isn't acceptable. This can be a good just as much as it can damage their reputation. In my opinion, the Dems need to rebuild a reputation that is connected to the people in some meaningful way. I don't get the sense that Democratic leadership see that as the core issue
  
  We didn't have 4/5 of state legislatures when we had Congress.
  If they don't get that it isn't acceptable now, nothing is going to convince them.
  I don't get why failing even more would make the Democratic Party look good.
- Maybe if they actually tried to do shit people would give them more power?
  
  Maybe if they tried to pass stuff repeatedly that they knew would fail, and certainly be painted in the majority right-wing mainstream media as incompetence - the swing voters who are largely poorly politically informed (according to polls) would somehow see these failures as reason to vote for them more? I like your optimism there but it runs contrary to history

Oh gee, another Dem exercise in futility. What a bunch of feckless losers.
- "Guys the system isn't broken, just one more big tweak and it'll be fine again, pinky promise."

Nice idea, but you're a decade late and billions of dollars short.
OTOH, it has always been important to keep introducing bills showing what you stand for even when they have no chance of passing, which (theoretically) builds public support over time (by getting press coverage and talking about it in interviews and on the campaign trail). For example Repubs have introduced bills to kill all or parts of the ACA over 50 times since it was passed, and they do that with lots of other issues--they just push and push and push their agenda regardless of whether it can pass.
But Dems don't. It's hard to take this effort by Dems seriously when the first time they've attempted to do this is only after the effects of the Citizens United ruling have come to full fruition. I know the only time they've had the majority again since the ACA was passed was the first half of Biden's term and they did get some good things done during that time. But the idea is to relentlessly try to do what you're sent there by your voters to do. So I guess it's a ... start?

Seems like they realize repubs are winning the 'get rich taking bribes' game so hard it's erasing America. Seems like it's bad enough to alienate donors? Edit: a word
- Pelosi also got rich taking bribes. Only socialists like Sanders and AOC actually fight for us
  
  Pelosi got rich by insider trading. Which unfortunately is legal for Congresscritters.

Just in time!
- A little too little, a little too late. They did jack shit when they had power.

Oh NOW Dems want to overturn Citizens United... When they have no more power! 💀🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Fucking useless.
- To be honest, the Dems have been trying to overturn Citizens United since it was decided. It's just too difficult to amend the Constitution. And only an amendment can overturn CU.
- The last time they could have made a constitutional amendment was when they had a supermajority in 1979. Two decades before Citizens United existed - but, go off.
  
  How many times did republicans try to impeach Biden? How many times does SOPA come back? Or attempts to remove E2EE? They should keep trying on important issues like citizens united.

John Roberts is a traitor to this country.
- A drop in the fucking swimming pool of traitors.
  
  well, a chief justice of the SCROTUS drop
- John Roberts will be remembered as the worst Chief Justice in American history. More than Taney.

I can't quite decide if this is just virtue signalling or not from the Democrats. I know some of them would genuinely support it, but this feels very much like it is too little, too late - if they were actually serious about saving democracy in the US, they could have done this when it actually stood a chance of being useful.
- Criticism against CU isn't new, Dems had every opportunity to propose this when they had control of the WH and Congress just 3 years ago. Only now are they making a scene of reeling back corporate influence because they know it'll never pass
  
  It was proposed almost immediately after CU but then, just as now, they never had the support to get it done.
  
  Yep, bullshit useless lib posturing.

This is moving waaaaaaay too fast. They really should rethink this before they do anything rash! Fucking losers

Citizens United has been fucked since jump

Why would SENATE REPUBLICANS be against an AMENDMENT named WE THE PEOPLE???

Typical governing bullshit. Try to do something good for the actual public, but only when it has zero hope of passing. Notice how for the past 25 years, anytime they could push this through, it was never brought up.

Dipshits: Dems are just as bad! They don't want to change the system!
Dems: prove again they want to change the system*
Dipshits: Oh yeah? Well . . . why didn't they do it already then?!?!
- Genuinely, why didn't they? Why didnt they do it when they had both the house and Senate? Are you somehow deluded into thinking this will actually go anywhere with the Republicans holding as much power as they currently are? This is just virtue signaling.
  
  Have you heard of the filibuster or the fact that it's been used by default on almost every piece of legislation for decades?
  
  When did they have the house and the senate? Literally - how many Congressional working days did they have a majority in the House and Senate?
  Did you say Zero days? Because that's the right answer. https://ballotpedia.org/Election_results,_2020:_Control_of_the_U.S._Senate

Please do!

Both
Sides.
- Losing a finger and losing a hand are different things.
  Not making excuses for dems but I am sick of this fucking empty headed fucking bill Maher horseshit.