Democrats prepare for election-year battle to craft Citizens United legislation

[NJmaverick]

Source: The Hill

Legislation that aims to counteract the landmark Supreme Court ruling allowing corporate and union campaign spending could be introduced by the end of the week.

The bill would set up an election-year fight over a recent high court decision just as the Senate considers a nominee to fill the seat of retiring Justice John Paul Stevens.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) are expected to unveil their legislation by the end of this week, although an announcement could slip into the beginning of next week, a Democratic aide said.

The Democrats are working to line up Republican support in both chambers to make the bill a bipartisan offering. Reps. Mike Castle (R-Del.), Todd Platts (R-Pa.) and Walter Jones (R-N.C.), all previous backers of campaign finance reform measures, are seen as the most likely GOP supporters of the bill, sources involved in the discussions said.

Read more: http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/91797-dems-ready-for-election-year-battle-on-citizens-united-bill

---

This is very important

[ClassWarrior]

1. K&R

:kick:

NGU.

[Arkana]

2. Good work on the Dems' part.

If they want to rehabilitate their image, this and financial reform are the right things to be doing right now.

[NJmaverick]

3. Agreed, those two items are good ones to be defined by

both will put them in good standing with the public

[cascadiance]

4. They really need a constitutional amendment on corporate personhood or this will get thrown out...

That's the sad truth. They need to do a very thoughtful campaign to START this now! That way, if it does get thrown out, then the Democrats can say about this amendment, "See, we told you this would happen if we didn't start moving on this amendment!". If one can point to other areas also that are affected by "corporate personhood", not just campaign affect "corporate free speech", then hopefully the electorate will see the magnitude of this monstrosity that lingers under the surface, and why the Democrats leading the charge to overturn it are doing the *REAL* people's work, not the corporate "people"'s work!

[NJmaverick]

5. I think they should be doing both. The amendment takes a long time

and could be seen as the long term solution. However if the damage isn't stopped now we may never get the amendment passed. So it would be a good 1-2 punch

[cascadiance]

7. Precisely, that's what I think was advocating...

The amendment without this OP's bill won't at least try to do something to fix something for the short term.

The OP's bill without the amendment, will get thrown out by SCOTUS, and we'll get blindsided by that. With the amendment already in the works, Roberts and company will be aware that they will be playing with fire to use what the amendment is all about to try and overturn this legislation, as it will just add fuel to getting that amendment passed eventually, which is what I'm sure he and his corporate benefactors are really afraid of.

Perhaps by having both in place, SCOTUS will avoid trying to tackle the other legislation right now and the corporate elites will try to use some other mechanism to fight it instead of using "corporate personhood rights" to throw it out shortly.

[cyclezealot]

6. If Citizens United Stands..

Why not, Just disband the Constitution and let the American Bankers Association select our president.. The new Constitution would call for a convention of bankers to select our new president of the United States.. Not sure who the new president would be, but a good nominee for V.P. would be x GOP Senator Phil Gramm..
They darn well run the country all ready. Why not make it official...