S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

Post Reply
Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#1

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:10 pm

Date: Thursday, July 10, 2014


Time: 09:30 AM


Location: Dirksen 226





III. Matter


S.J. Res. 19, A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections (T. Udall, Feinstein, Schumer, Durbin, Whitehouse, Klobuchar, Franken, Coons, Blumenthal, Hirono)


[/break1]judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/executive-business-meeting-2014-07-10]http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meeting ... 2014-07-10The Senate Judiciary Committee has scheduled an Executive Business Meeting this Thursday. Since S.J. Res. 19 was on the agenda at the previous meeting (June 26) and held over at the request of Sen Grassley it will likely be voted on Thursday to be forwarded to the full Senate. A wager on a 10y-8n party-line recorded vote will likely get you less than even money.



User avatar
Mikedunford
Posts: 9553
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 9:42 pm

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#2

Post by Mikedunford » Mon Jul 07, 2014 11:57 pm

Not only is this posturing, it's stupid posturing.


"I don't give a fuck whether we're peers or not."
--Lord Thomas Henry Bingham to Boris Johnson, on being asked whether he would miss being in "the best club in London" if the Law Lords moved from Parliament to a Supreme Court.

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31119
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#3

Post by mimi » Tue Jul 08, 2014 8:52 am

huh?It's about campaign finance reform, right? Though I don't think anything is going to happen with this Congress.



Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#4

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Tue Jul 08, 2014 1:01 pm

I believe it's safe to say the proposed amendment is election year politicking. The chances of S.J. Res. 19 receiving 50%+1 "aye" votes in the House, much less the 2/3 needed for a constitutional amendment, are less than slim. The prospects in the Senate are better but a 2/3 favorable vote is unlikely there as well.There will likely be some proposed legislation brought to the Senate floor (substitute unanimous requests for the minority) for the purpose of highlighting differences between Democrats and Republicans just as there is in most even numbered years regardless which party is in control. :yawn:SSDD.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#5

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Tue Jul 08, 2014 1:03 pm

The difference between the Democrats and the Republicans is that the Dems won't bring it up and vote for it 50 times.



Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#6

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Thu Jul 10, 2014 10:32 pm

Sen Durbin gave an impassioned speech in favor of the proposed amendment that begins at the 48:40 mark (each Senator was limited to 5 minutes). Sen Cruz then gave a speech against the proposal that was just as impassioned. Sen Hirono mentioned Minor v Happersett but forgot to mention the 2 parent citizen thingie.


[/break1]judiciary.senate.gov/meetings/executive-business-meeting-2014-07-10]http://www.judiciary.senate.gov/meeting ... 2014-07-10


There is no constitutional right to buy an election.
► Show Spoiler



User avatar
Addie
Posts: 28035
Joined: Mon Jun 15, 2009 6:22 am
Location: downstairs

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#7

Post by Addie » Mon Sep 08, 2014 7:57 pm

PoliticsUSA Senate Votes 79-18 To Advance a Constitutional Amendment To Overturn Citizens United ... The amendment read,Section 1. To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections. Section 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such entities from spending money to influence elections. Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.’


¡Sterngard! come home.

Joseph Robidoux III
Posts: 5619
Joined: Fri Feb 11, 2011 6:02 am

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#8

Post by Joseph Robidoux III » Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:23 pm

The Senate vote summary lists the yeas and nays for the motion to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to S.J.Res. 19.



User avatar
Sterngard Friegen
Posts: 43902
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2009 12:32 am
Location: Over the drawbridge

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#9

Post by Sterngard Friegen » Mon Sep 08, 2014 8:24 pm

Doesn't appear to be political posturing. Senators all understand that Citizens United threatens incumbents!



User avatar
MN-Skeptic
Posts: 2332
Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2012 6:36 pm
Location: Twin Cities

S.J. Res. 19: Proposed Constitutional Amendment (Citizens United)

#10

Post by MN-Skeptic » Sat Nov 29, 2014 11:07 am

I'm not sure where to put this so I'll put it here.



The Daily Beast has an interesting article about CounterPAC, an "organization designed to fight dysfunction in politics by changing the rules of the game." The article explains:



While most people seeking to fix government focus on getting the so-called “right” people elected—those who they believe will become legislative champions—the idea of CounterPAC is to take a more direct approach. By creating and introducing new incentive structures into elections, CounterPAC motivates candidates—regardless of what views they initially hold—to adopt practices that will bring more accountability to their race. In other words, it seeks to make running cleaner, better campaigns in the candidates’ self-interest.

The 2014 midterms were a test flight for the CounterPAC model. Operating as a super PAC, CounterPAC entered several of the most competitive races in the election, calling on candidates to make agreements voluntarily rejecting support from groups who receive money from undisclosed, secret donors. The incentive? If candidates failed to take action, CounterPAC was ready to hold them accountable.







An interesting approach. More at the link above.


MAGA - Morons Are Governing America

Post Reply

Return to “Congress”