By Alyssa Lafage | The Save Jersey Blog
Ever since the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision on Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Save Jerseyans, Democrats have criticized the role of Super PACs in politics, claiming that it is a way for evil rich guys like the Koch Brothers to spend unlimited amounts of money thus having too much influence.
A few Democrat State Senators from New Jersey have attempted to take matters into their own hands to address the issue of big money in politics by calling for an Article V Constitutional Convention of the states.
Yeah, let that sink in for a moment. New Jersey Democrats are calling for an Article V convention!
SCR 132, introduced by Senator Linda Greenstein, will be up for discussion during a Committee Hearing in Trenton this afternoon at 1PM in Committee Room 7, 2nd Floor, at the State House Annex.
The bill reads in part:
This concurrent resolution makes application to the Congress of the United States of America for a convention to be called under Article V of the Constitution of the United States for the sole, specific and exclusive purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that would limit the corrupting influence of money in our political system including by overturning the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission and related cases.
You can read the entire bill here.
As a supporter of an Article V convention, I shiver at the thought of Democrats leading the charge. This is one of the very things of which skeptics of Mark Levin’s Liberty Amendments were fearful.
Side note: While Democrats are some of the most outspoken opponents of big money in politics, they are largely outpacing Republicans in raising and spending money via super PACs; in fact, most of the “mega-donor” individual and organizations in American politics tend to support the Left side of the aisle.
can she say, George Soros??????
Fine….the GOP has several things we want as well. We also have more State Legislatures voting our way. This whole Dem wanting an article 5 convention is only for fools that don’t even know what it is.
That’s all these unhinged douchebags have. Halliburton, the Koch’s..it’s like an uncontrollable twitch. One that starts twitching badly when they can’t have their way 100% of the time. The left does not like competition.
1. As of yesterday, New Jersey has passed this resolution and now joins three other states in calling for an Article V Convention on this issue.
2. I don’t understand the fear from the Right here. If, as the article claims, Democrats outraise and outspend Republicans, why would limiting the amount of money that can be spent help Democrats? If it is true that the majority of the citizens support Conservative ideas, wouldn’t this make it easier for them to be heard and to influence policy?
3. This author is a supporter of an Article V Convention. I assume this means she either supports a balanced budget amendment or the Convention of States project to limit federal power. But it also means that she must support the process in general, believing it to be safe, effective, small-d democratic and necessary. But she shivers at the thought of a group she dislikes politically using the same process? You can’t have it both ways. I trust that her Constitutional principles don’t stop at “the aspects that happen to suit my ideology are the only worthy ones.”
4. This particular movement (the one that filed SCR 132) is a cross-partisan effort, with activity in approximately 40 states, and progress already in several Red state legislatures. Conservatives who aren’t seeing life through the filter of a constant left-right tug of war are no happier with a few special interests controlling our elections (for Conservatives, the Bogey Men are Michael Bloomberg, George Soros, Tom Steyer, Richard Trumka, etc.) than Liberals are. Democrats happened to be the party pushing for this convention in New Jersey, but in other states the effort has been largely led by Republicans. I understand that this site has a particular focus on New Jersey, but this article does an incomplete job at giving this context. This particular call for a Convention is not an ideological crusade like Levin’s proposal is. Also (and not mentioned here either), it emphatically includes unions and NGO’s as among the groups whose influence it wants to limit, not simply corporations.
5. I don’t know why anyone would not support this idea, save for kneejerk paranoia about it being a conspiracy to somehow screw the American public, either by the Left or by the wealthy. Ask yourself if the current situation is better and you’d like to keep it going, because you fear change more than you dislike the status quo.