Get Big Money Out of Politics!
What's the Problem?
What's the Problem?
Because of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2010 in Citizens United vs. FEC, corporations can provided unlimited amounts of "dark money" to candidates. In essence, the ruling says that corporations are people, money is speech, and Americans CANNOT set limits on political spending.
Because of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 2010 in Citizens United vs. FEC, corporations can provided unlimited amounts of "dark money" to candidates. In essence, the ruling says that corporations are people, money is speech, and Americans CANNOT set limits on political spending.
The “corporations are people” metaphor allows corporations to inject vast sums of money into the political system.
The “corporations are people” metaphor allows corporations to inject vast sums of money into the political system.
The “money is speech” metaphor allows wealthy individuals to skirt campaign finance laws and contribute vast, untraceable funds into “dark money” operations.
The “money is speech” metaphor allows wealthy individuals to skirt campaign finance laws and contribute vast, untraceable funds into “dark money” operations.
Corporations are not people; they are tools to help organize economic activity. And money is not speech, it is a megaphone to amplify the voices of those fortunate to have lots of money.
Corporations are not people; they are tools to help organize economic activity. And money is not speech, it is a megaphone to amplify the voices of those fortunate to have lots of money.
How Do We Fix the Problem?
How Do We Fix the Problem?
Citizens United, which (among other cases) allows unlimited corporate spending in direct support of political candidates, was based on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the United States Constitution, specifically the First Amendment. It therefore cannot be overturned by a new Act of Congress; only a Constitutional amendment can clarify that the rights of corporations are subordinate to the rights of natural persons, and that corporate spending in the election process can be regulated or eliminated. The 28th Amendment would codify these distinctions.
Citizens United, which (among other cases) allows unlimited corporate spending in direct support of political candidates, was based on the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the United States Constitution, specifically the First Amendment. It therefore cannot be overturned by a new Act of Congress; only a Constitutional amendment can clarify that the rights of corporations are subordinate to the rights of natural persons, and that corporate spending in the election process can be regulated or eliminated. The 28th Amendment would codify these distinctions.
What the 28th Amendment Will Do
What the 28th Amendment Will Do
1) Secure fair, free elections;
1) Secure fair, free elections;
2) Protect the rights of all Americans to equal participation and representation; and
2) Protect the rights of all Americans to equal participation and representation; and
3) Return to original liberties for people rather than new privileges for the largest corporations, unions, and special interests.
3) Return to original liberties for people rather than new privileges for the largest corporations, unions, and special interests.
What Will It Take to Get the 28th Amendment on the 2018 Ballot?
What Will It Take to Get the 28th Amendment on the 2018 Ballot?
In order for the measure to appear on the 2020 Wyoming ballot, approximately 39,000 registered voter signatures from across Wyoming must be obtained by volunteers and VERIFIED by the Wyoming Secretary of State's office by fall of 2018. To ensure that we meet or beat this number, our statewide goal is obtain 50,000+ signatures.
In order for the measure to appear on the 2020 Wyoming ballot, approximately 39,000 registered voter signatures from across Wyoming must be obtained by volunteers and VERIFIED by the Wyoming Secretary of State's office by fall of 2018. To ensure that we meet or beat this number, our statewide goal is obtain 50,000+ signatures.