To: Ed Markey, Congressman and U.S. Senate candidate, Gabriel Gomez, U.S. Senate candidate, and Sen. Elizabeth Warren (MA-1)
Protect our democracy from unlimited spending in elections, and from corporate constitutional rights
Dear Massachusetts U.S. Senate Delegation,
A constitutional amendment is necessary to preserve and protect our democracy from the avalanche of special interest money buying our elections and policy, as well as the extension of constitutional rights to corporations that has resulted in the courts overturning hundreds of laws protecting our health, safety, and environment.
To address these threats to self-government, we urge you to sponsor the first constitutional amendment in the U.S. Senate affirming that 1) corporations are not entitled to the constitutional rights of human beings, and 2) money spent to influence elections may be regulated by Congress and the states, and such regulation is not prohibited as protected free speech by the First Amendment.
A constitutional amendment is necessary to preserve and protect our democracy from the avalanche of special interest money buying our elections and policy, as well as the extension of constitutional rights to corporations that has resulted in the courts overturning hundreds of laws protecting our health, safety, and environment.
To address these threats to self-government, we urge you to sponsor the first constitutional amendment in the U.S. Senate affirming that 1) corporations are not entitled to the constitutional rights of human beings, and 2) money spent to influence elections may be regulated by Congress and the states, and such regulation is not prohibited as protected free speech by the First Amendment.
Why is this important?
Government by the people is increasingly under attack by big money in politics and corporate constitutional rights, and only an amendment to the U.S. Constitution can fix the problem.
Several amendments have been proposed in the House to address these issues, including H.J.RES.20 and H.J.RES.21 proposed by Congressmen McGovern [MA-2] as well as H.J.RES.29 proposed by Congressman Rick Nolan [MN-8]. However, similar amendments have not been proposed in the Senate.
Supreme Court decisions have unleashed an avalanche of money in our elections that shapes the public dialogue, greatly influences who will run for and win elected office, and makes our elected representatives increasingly beholden to the biggest donors rather than to the voters.
To make matters worse, the Court has used the assertion that corporations have constitutional rights to strike down hundreds of local, state, and federal laws protecting our democracy, our health, and our safety. For example: The Court overturned a law banning corporate funding of ballot question campaigns; nullified state laws requiring the food industry to disclose all of the ingredients in our foods; and prevented our communities from banning cigarette advertising near schools in the name of “corporate free speech.” But corporations are not people.
Only a constitutional amendment can undo these threats to self-government and ensure that government works for us—not just for corporations and wealthy interests. A constitutional amendment will protect sensible campaign finance laws as well as safeguard laws that keep us safe and healthy.
The Massachusetts Senate delegation should lead on this issue by sponsoring the first constitutional amendment in the Senate that addresses both unlimited spending in elections and corporate constitutional rights. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people depends on it.
For information about the Democracy Amendment Coalition of Massachusetts (DACMA) and the constitutional amendment movement in Massachusetts, visit www.DemocracyAmendmentMass.org.
Several amendments have been proposed in the House to address these issues, including H.J.RES.20 and H.J.RES.21 proposed by Congressmen McGovern [MA-2] as well as H.J.RES.29 proposed by Congressman Rick Nolan [MN-8]. However, similar amendments have not been proposed in the Senate.
Supreme Court decisions have unleashed an avalanche of money in our elections that shapes the public dialogue, greatly influences who will run for and win elected office, and makes our elected representatives increasingly beholden to the biggest donors rather than to the voters.
To make matters worse, the Court has used the assertion that corporations have constitutional rights to strike down hundreds of local, state, and federal laws protecting our democracy, our health, and our safety. For example: The Court overturned a law banning corporate funding of ballot question campaigns; nullified state laws requiring the food industry to disclose all of the ingredients in our foods; and prevented our communities from banning cigarette advertising near schools in the name of “corporate free speech.” But corporations are not people.
Only a constitutional amendment can undo these threats to self-government and ensure that government works for us—not just for corporations and wealthy interests. A constitutional amendment will protect sensible campaign finance laws as well as safeguard laws that keep us safe and healthy.
The Massachusetts Senate delegation should lead on this issue by sponsoring the first constitutional amendment in the Senate that addresses both unlimited spending in elections and corporate constitutional rights. Government of the people, by the people, and for the people depends on it.
For information about the Democracy Amendment Coalition of Massachusetts (DACMA) and the constitutional amendment movement in Massachusetts, visit www.DemocracyAmendmentMass.org.