Citizens United Anniversary

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. UDALL of New Mexico. Mr. President, I very much appreciate joining all my colleagues on the floor who have been speaking about the Citizens United case. I think what we are seeing in the Senate is what we are seeing in the country. The citizens of this country are concerned about unlimited corporate funds in campaigns, and Senators who are also concerned about that are standing and speaking out, as I know our Presiding Officer has, and are offering constitutional amendments in trying to resolve the situation we have before us.

Two years ago this week, the Supreme Court issued its misguided decision in Citizens United v. FEC. Citizens United was a victory for special interests at the expense of the average American. It held that corporations deserve the same free speech protections as individual Americans. It enables these corporations to spend freely from their treasuries on campaign advertising. It also gave rise to so-called super PACs that we are seeing too much of. These super PACs can raise and spend unlimited funds to campaign for or against candidates.

Now, what do we mean by corporate treasuries and super PACs? Let me cite an example. Exxon--the large oil company--has $80 billion in its corporate treasury. If Exxon wanted to go out and create a super PAC or contribute to these 200-plus super PACs that are out there to the tune of $80 billion, it could do it. That is what the Supreme Court opened in terms of its ruling.

The toxic effect of this ruling has become brutally clear in the last 2 years. The Citizens United decision opened the floodgates to unprecedented campaign spending, drowning out the voices of ordinary Americans. Huge sums of unregulated, unaccountable money are flooding the airwaves. An endless wave of attack ads, paid for by billionaires, is poisoning our political discourse. The American public--rightly so--looks on in disgust. As we head into the election year, this bad situation will only get worse. The checkbooks are out, and the money is gushing. Citizens United really means citizens denied--denied a fair playing field, denied an equitable influence in our political system, denied their right to be truly heard, and denied the right to even know who is spending all of this money.

While much of the focus this week is on Citizens United, we must realize that the corruption of our campaign finance system did not suddenly happen 2 years ago. The Citizens United decision sparked a renewed focus on the need for reform, but the Supreme Court laid the groundwork for a broken system many years ago.

In 1976, the Court held in Buckley v. Valeo that restricting candidate campaign expenditures violates the first amendment right to free speech. It established the flawed precedent that money and speech are the same. Since then, the influence of money has continued to play an increasing role in our Nation's elections. Sadly, in many cases, a candidate's ability to either raise money or self-finance can outweigh the quality of a candidate's ideas or dedication to public service.

The Buckley and Citizens United decisions, among others, demonstrate the Court's willingness to ignore longstanding precedent and declare our campaign finance laws unconstitutional. Because of this, I believe the only way to truly fix the problem is to first amend the Constitution and grant Congress clear authority to regulate the campaign finance system. In November of last year, I introduced such an amendment. I am proud to say it currently has 19 cosponsors and support continues to grow.

Our proposed constitutional amendment is broadly tailored and similar to bipartisan proposals introduced in previous sessions of Congress dating back to 1983. It would authorize Congress to regulate the raising and spending of money for Federal political campaigns, including independent expenditures, and it would allow States to regulate such spending at their level. It would not dictate any specific policies or regulations.

I chose my approach to not only overturn the previous bad Court decisions but also to prevent future ones. We don't know what a future Court may do. In Citizens United, the Court upheld campaign contribution disclosure requirements. A future Court might declare the same laws unconstitutional. Our amendment would remedy this problem by restoring Congress's authority--stripped by Buckley v. Valeo and subsequent decisions--to regulate the campaign finance system. If ratified, the amendment would ensure that campaign finance laws would stand constitutional challenges regardless of the makeup of the Supreme Court.

The text of my constitutional amendment and any of the others is less important right now than the concept. Hearings can be held, and the text can be worked out. That is really the easy part of a difficult process. What is harder to achieve--and something we rarely see in our country--is gaining the widespread support necessary to amend the Constitution.

The Citizens United decision was disastrous, and it may have been the very catalyst we needed to build a movement to amend the Constitution. There is a groundswell of support growing across the country for a constitutional amendment to rein in the out-of-control campaign finance system. City councils, from places as diverse as Los Angeles and New York to Missoula, MT, have endorsed resolutions calling on Congress to pass an amendment. Several grassroots organizations and coalitions have formed to advocate an amendment. Hundreds of thousands of citizens have signed petitions. Is it difficult to amend the Constitution? Yes, and it should be. But I believe the growing momentum demonstrates that this is the right time for Congress to act.

Our Founders did not intend for elections to be bought and paid for by secretive super PACs. Our Founders did not bequeath a government of the millionaires, by the millionaires, and for the millionaires. Money can have a corrosive effect on the political process. We have seen evidence of that in campaigns at all levels of government.

We need to put elections back in the hands of average Americans and not in
the hands of special interests with unlimited bank accounts. We need to answer to the American people and not just to the privileged. Our Nation cannot afford a system that says ``come on in'' to the rich and powerful but then says ``don't bother'' to everyone else. The faith of the American people in their electoral system is being corrupted by big money. It is time to restore that faith. It is time for Congress to take back control. It is time for a constitutional amendment that will allow real reform.
With that, Mr. President, I yield the floor, and I suggest the absence of a quorum.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source