 Now, Senate Democrats want to fix it.
Fresh off summer vacation, Senate Majority Harry Reid, D-Nevada, and his pals
could hold a procedural vote as soon as Monday evening on a constitutional
amendment that would amend the First Amendment.
To its supporters, the proposed amendment is designed to limit the influence of
money in politics.
AP photo
AP photo
POLITICS FIRST: Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., has his mind set on
amending the First Amendment. Reid and supporters say it’s all about taking big
money out of politics. Critics say the effort is all about politics and Harry
Reid.
To those who hold sacred the protections afforded to religion, free speech, the
right to peaceably assemble and to petition the government for a redress of
grievances, the amendment, authored by Sen. Tom Udall, D-N.M., is fighting
words.
“Forty-six Senate Democrats have concluded that the First Amendment is an
impediment to re-election that a little tinkering can cure,” former Solicitor
General Theodore B. Olson wrote Tuesday in Wall Street Journal opinion piece
headlined, “Harry Reid Rewrites the First Amendment.”
As Olson notes, the constitutional amendment would “give Congress and state
legislatures the authority to regulate the degree to which citizens can devote
their resources to advocating the election or defeat of candidates.”
“Voters, whatever their political views, should rise up against politicians who
want to dilute the Bill of Rights to perpetuate their tenure in office,” Olson
writes.
This urgent campaign to change what has been described as the “Blue Collar
amendment” because of its everyday application by U.S. citizens, is a reaction
to the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling that struck down previous
limits on money in politics.
“Amending our Constitution is not something any of us should take lightly, but
the flood of special interest money in our American democracy is one of the
glaring threats our system of government has ever faced,” Reid said in May on
the Senate floor. “Let’s keep our elections from becoming speculative ventures
for the wealthy.”
Democrats certainly seem to have brought in truckloads of money for their
campaigns, thanks to the First Amendment and the drive to change it.
The Democratic National Campaign Committee sent a mass appeal Monday trumpeting
that Monday “could be an historic moment.”
“The Senate is set to vote on a Constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens
United. It would be a huge step forward towards removing the corrosive influence
of unlimited corporate money in our elections,” the email states.
The DNCC then turns up the partisan heat.
“Unfortunately, Republicans are already signaling that they will obstruct the
bill. That’s a big relief to the Big Oil billionaires who are backing them.
“Listen, we have to show Republicans that voters won’t wait any longer — we want
change NOW. That means we need an immense display of public pressure demanding
they support overturning Citizens United.”
To that end, Democrats are pan-handling for another 50,000 signatures, claiming
they are close to hitting their goal of 250,000 names on a petition in support
of amending the amendment.
[to top of second column]
|
It’s also a great way to tap potential donors for financial
support.
Gene Policinski, senior vice president of the First Amendment
Center, said the concern about money in politics is well documented,
but changing the right that more Americans recognize more than all
others presents a slippery slope of dangers.
“I think we tinker with free speech and the ability for Americans to
truly express themselves at a peril,” said Policinski, who also
serves as chief operating officer of the Newseum Institute. “There
are many things most of us would not like to hear, but one
constitutional amendment could beget another and suddenly we are in
a society where you can’t say this or that.”
“People around the world die every day to have what Americans have
when the wake up in the morning.”
Reid’s scheme has little chance of going anywhere, beginning with
the Senate, where filibuster is a certainty. Any amendment to the
Constitution requires congressional approval, with two-thirds
backing in both Houses. A proposed amendment must also garner
support from three-fourths of the states.
Still, an opinion piece in the American Spectator argues that this
“would-be 28th Amendment is poorly drafted, extremely dangerous, and
has the potential to uproot our most cherished freedoms.”
“Its supporters should be embarrassed and the amendment should be
stopped immediately,” the publication declares.
Democrats rallying around the proposed amendment seem anything but
embarrassed about the prospect of changing the first guarantee in
the Bill of Rights. And they certainly seemed poised to make money
off what critics see as a partisan, phony fight.
Print This Article
Click here to LEARN HOW TO STEAL OUR STUFF!
M.D. Kittle
Kittle is a 25-year veteran of radio, newspaper and online
journalism. In July 2011, Kittle joined Watchdog.org as bureau chief
for Wisconsin Reporter. He has spent much of the past three years
covering the seismic political changes taking place in the Badger
State. Last year, Kittle joined Watchdog’s national reporting team,
covering everything from energy policy to governmental assaults on
civil rights. Beyond being published in Wisconsin’s daily newspapers
and in multimedia news outlets, Kittle’s work has appeared on Fox
News, and in Human Events, Reason Magazine, Newsmax and Town Hall.
His special investigation into a politically charged John Doe probe,
“Wisconsin’s Secret War,” was the basis of a 2014 documentary on
Glenn Beck’s TheBlaze. Kittle has made several appearances on Fox
News, including “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren. He serves as
weekly politics commentator for Lake 96.1 FM in Lake Geneva, and
WRJN-AM 1400 in Racine. His resume includes multiple awards for
journalism excellence from The Associated Press, Inland Press,
Wisconsin Broadcast Association and other journalism associations.
Contact Kittle at mkittle@watchdog.org.
mkittle@wisconsinreporter.com
608-257-1395
[This
article courtesy of
Watchdog.]
Click here to respond to the editor about this
article.
 |
