Posts Tagged ‘Campaign Finance’

"Bart Naylor" "Financial policy reform"Four years ago this month, the world’s financial sector exploded, shooting shrapnel through the economy. Wounds fester to this day.

Last year this month, public outrage at Wall Street and general corporate corruption exploded in the form of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Benefits abound.

Defying easy definition, with no leadership structure, no official spokesperson, no office, not even a proverbial mission statement, “Occupations” rapidly proliferated through the United States and overseas. And the accomplishments of this otherwise amorphous energy have been concrete and sweeping. Here are a just a few:

  • OWS unburied from overlooked economics studies and made common knowledge the harsh reality of income inequality. “We are the 99 percent,” declared this movement. Among the alarming statistics: The wealthiest 400 Americans have more savings that half the entire national population.
  • Sniffed at by some for unformed/nebulous views, the OccupyTheSEC group penned an authoritative 300-page analysis of the complex Wall Street Reform Act Volcker Rule. While Wall Street’s high paid lawyers publicly complained about the rule’s difficulty, this Occupy group, composed of former derivative traders surgically dissected each detail of the federal proposal, identifying strength and weaknesses. Since then, senior staff at Washington regulatory agencies have consulted these Occupy experts.
  • Oppressed American workers, including those in beleaguered unions, drew energy from Occupy help. In New York City, for example, Occupy protestors joined in a symbolic 99 picket lines at work sites and banks. Occupy’s support for Con-Edison workers in New York locked out of their resulted in reciprocal support for specific OWS actions.
  • OWS increased attention to the corruption of corporate money in politics. Occupy proved important in approval of the STOCK Act, making members of Congress subject to the same anti-insider trading laws as average Americans. Occupy drew attention to the Supreme Court’s decision in “Citizens United” that reduced restrictions on corporate spending. That resulted in further support for the DISCLOSE Act as well as a constitutional amendment to reverse the court’s decision.

Movement or moment? Traditional conflict has supplanted OWS in the media, namely political elections. But self-identified Occupy members remain vigilant. The OccupyTheSEC gang, as noted, has continued its expert efforts on a widening front. But just as communication revolutionizes yearly (email, social networking, Twitter, livestreaming), it may be impossible to track the trajectory of Occupy. Rather, Occupy may be shattering such distinctions as movement and moment. This non-organization organization Occupy, may, in fact, be a verb.

Bartlett Naylor is Public Citizen’s financial policy advocate. Check out his piece, “Wall Street and the Cost of Forgetting” and follow him on Twitter @BartNaylor.

Kwame Brown & Mayor Vincent Gray

Former D.C. Council Chair Kwame Brown (left) and D.C. Mayor Vincent Gray (far right). Brown resigned last week after pleading guilty to bank fraud and misusing campaign money.

The U.S. Attorney has taken an active role in our local government. So has the FBI, the D.C. Office of Campaign Finance, and the D.C. Attorney General. Now it’s time for fellow residents to take action, and here’s a great way to do it: Sign the petition for Initiative 70, which will end the destructive pay-to-play culture at the Wilson Building (D.C.’s City Hall).

I’ve helped gather signatures a couple of times to get Initiative 70 on November’s ballot. Last weekend, I was hitting up friends and neighbors. One neighbor cut me off after my first sentence and grabbed the paper out of my hand. “No need to say more,” he said. “I’ll sign.” Still another signed, saying that he supported the measure. He then added that the massive effort being undertaken to get the measure before the voters shouldn’t be necessary.  “We elect people to make hard decisions,” he said.  “We shouldn’t have to do this.”

He’s absolutely right. But this is Washington, D.C. You might have heard that the Council has had a few problems lately.

Continue Reading

Former U.S. Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens may be retired, but he’s clearly lost none of the verve that saw him through 35 years on the court and landmark opinions for the ages like his scathing dissent in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. Fittingly enough, the number of cities, towns and state legislatures joining him to condemn the court’s decision to hand unprecedented power over our democracy to the corporate elite seems to grow by the day.

Next week, citizens around the nation will take actions to spotlight that rising tide and the grassroots movement that is driving it. At a time when the obscene amount of money that went into Wisconsin’s recall elections has reminded us once again just what Citizens United has wrought, Resolutions Week events will remind America that democracy is alive and kicking in the growing momentum for the ultimate solution to the auctioning of our democracy: a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United and related cases.

This May, Rhode Island became the fifth state legislature to demand a constitutional amendment to restore free and fair elections to the American people. A resolution to that effect overwhelmingly passed the Rhode Island General Assembly, while more than 200 cities and towns across the country have passed similar resolutions at the local level. Many more states, including California and Massachusetts, and local communities are waiting in the wings.

They’re heeding the call of a grassroots movement that’s growing organically in every single state.  Average citizens like California high school student Glenn Kimball become outraged upon noticing that the court is getting the Constitution wrong and undermining the integrity of our democracy. Next, they gradually and doggedly rally their neighbors and local leaders in growing numbers, and persuade their local city council or state legislators to demand action from Congress. That process repeats itself in a different community literally every day on average.

Justice Stevens’ widely covered remarks last week continued to emphasize why. The Citizens United majority went against the grain of its own rulings, past and subsequent, when it claimed that regulations cannot ever take into account the identity of a “speaker,” let alone a powerful multinational corporation with perpetual life spending money to buy influence. The court also severely contradicted its own logic just this year by leaving in place a lower-court ruling that noted the need to protect the integrity of elections from interference by the contributions of individual foreigners living in the U.S.; it notably declined to explain why their non-citizen identity mattered at all.

Citizens United and the related rulings that gave rise to it also, as Stevens noted, prevent democratically elected representatives at all levels to from effectively ensuring that elections are not corrupted by corporations and the wealthiest among us. That’s why it’s fitting and proper that elected officials at all levels of government are responding to citizen outcry demanding a constitutional amendment, and echoing it themselves in such rapidly growing numbers.

This is, in fact, what American democracy has always done when dedicated citizens realize that the rights and voices of We the People are not properly being recognized in our democracy, and take action to etch that demand into the Constitution. Former U.S. Senator Bill Bradley recently echoed that point to columnist Joel Connelly, praising the Seattle City Council’s unanimous passage of a constitutional-amendment resolution as a nationwide model rooted deeply in our history:

“The only way to do it is a Constitutional Amendment,” said Bradley.  “It has happened before when people felt powerless before corruption.  A Constitutional Amendment gave us direct election of U.S. Senators.”

[….]

The Seattle City Council recently voted for a resolution calling for the overturning of Citizens United, joining about 100 other cities.  The resolution was widely seen as tilting at windmills – but not by Bradley.

“It’s great,” he said. “It’s how change begins. Now, you try to get states to petition for a Constitutional Amendment. And then you get groups.”

Far from trying to intimidate the justices in an allegedly unprecedented way or censor anyone’s ability to speak freely, as Citizens United’s small handful of defenders have taken to alleging, Americans like Glenn Kimball are at the vanguard of modeling what American democracy should look like even as they advocate for its preservation.

And just as with the suffragettes, the abolitionists, and the previous century’s pro-democracy reformers, future students reading about their actions and determination will do so with continuing gratitude. Americans dismayed by the unprecedented spending in this year’s campaigns and despairing
over the way it played out in Wisconsin earlier, would do well to join them, both next week and beyond.

Sean Siperstein is a Legal Fellow with Public Citizen’s Democracy is For People campaign. Follow the campaign on Twitter @RuleByUs, as well as the hashtag #Democracy4 Sale, for the latest on money and politics and the campaign for a constitutional amendment!

"Robert Weissman, Public Citizen president"Well, the Big Business guys are transparent about one thing: They can’t stand the idea of the public holding them to account for their attempts to buy elections and influence policy, or even that they be prevented from corrupting the government contracting process through campaign spending.

The latest: They are so terrified even of having their political spending disclosed that they are pushing in Congress legislation that would prohibit the government from requiring contractors to disclose their campaign-related spending.

Senator Susan Collins, R-Maine, is carrying their water, with the Orwellian “Keeping Politics Out of Federal Contracting Act,” a bill that recently passed the Committee on Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs and may well become law unless citizens move quickly to help stop this abomination.

The Collins initiative is in response to an excellent initiative floated by the Obama administration, but which the White House failed to implement. The simple idea was to require government contractors to disclose their campaign-related spending, including the kind of secret corporate campaign expenditures enabled by the Citizens United decision.

Contractor disclosure is important for two key reasons. First, virtually every major corporation enters into contracts with the government, so if contractors are required to disclose their campaign spending, that would cover most giant businesses. Second, the corrupting pall of campaign-related contributions is worst in the area of government contracting, since this is where the direct payoffs to corporations from political spending are highest. Disclosure will help mitigate the campaign-contractor corruption nexus.

Last year, it leaked that the Obama administration was considering an executive order requiring contractor disclosure.

Continue Reading

Even as the nationwide grassroots rebellion sparked by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission continues to spread, citizens concerned that our  democracy is being auctioned off to secretive, unaccountable interests are getting some backup from the lower federal courts. On Monday afternoon, a panel of the DC Circuit Court of Appeals refused to stay the opinion of the district court that effectively closed – for the time being, at least — a regulatory loophole that allowed wealthy individuals and corporations funding so-called “issue ads” in the lead-up to an election to avoid disclosure, so long as they gave to “charitable” non-profit groups started by “philanthropists” like Republican political strategist Karl Rove.

Last month, a lower court found that the 2007 Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulation that created the loophole “arbitrarily and capriciously” undermined the law’s clear intent to force disclosure, one that even the Citizens United ruling affirmed. By declining to stay that ruling, and finding in the process that it will likely be upheld when it is argued on its merits this fall, the appeals court ensured that donors of more than $1,000 for electioneering communications previously shielded from the public eye are going to have to face disclosure.

This week’s ruling comes in the midst of a loud wave of shareholder activism demanding that corporate leaders stop meddling in electoral politics, and to at least fully disclose what they’re up to if they continue.

Continue Reading

© Copyright . All Rights Reserved.