Constitutional amendments needed to address campaign finance and Social Security taxation

Constitution & Governmental Gridlock

Constitutional Change #1

A constitutional amendment is needed to overturn the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United, Appellant v. Federal Election Commission. In this case, the United States Supreme Court held that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting political independent expenditures by corporations, associations, or labor unions. Corporations aren't people. Only people are people. The United States District Court for the District of Columbia reversed a provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) prohibiting unions, corporations and not-for-profit organizations from broadcasting electioneering communications within 60 days of a general election or 30 days of a primary election that held these actions violate the free speech clause of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. Yet two-thirds of American small business owners say that Citizens United hurts their business, but only nine percent of the small businesses polled said that it was a positive law. An important reason for this divide is that the Supreme Court ruing in Citizens United gives corporations the right to contribute to political campaigns without restrictions and in the same manner as individual American citizens. The deep pockets of corporations enable them to, in essence, buy votes and have inordinate influence on political elections. Corporations that assert their right to "be people" and engage in tax inversion strategies should not be permitted to lobby Congress or have representation in the Houses of Congress. Tax dollars fuel the government, and by taking their domicile oversees, these companies not only lower their tax burden, they stop paying taxes to the U.S. government. American citizens are not granted such an easy route to tax avoidance, nor should corporations be -- this regardless of their status under the law as "persons." An amendment to the Constitution is needed to restore the status of corporations as businesses with profit motives that are categorically different from the concerns of individual citizens.

Constitutional Change #3

The Voting Rights Amendment Act of 2014 (sponsored by Sensenbrenner, Conyers, and Leahy) would strengthen the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (VRA) in response to the Supreme Court decision last June that invalidated a critical section of the VRA. In the Shelby County v. Holder ruling on June 25, 2013, the conservative majority of the Supreme Court struck down Section 4 of the VRA. This section served as a protection against voting discrimination, in that it compelled certain states with a well-documented history of voting discrimination to clear any proposed changes to voting practices or regulations with the federal government under Section 5 of the VRA. That the sections provided necessary protections is evidenced by the fact that since the Shelby decision, eight states previously covered under Section 4 have passed or implemented new voting restrictions, like the new draconian laws recently enacted in North Carolina and Texas. The Sensenbrenner-Conyers-Leahy bill would strengthen the VRA. However, an Amendment to the constitution is needed to prevent the conservative Supreme Court from playing loose with voter protection laws, and to prevent the states from restricting the rights of citizens, as in Amendment 14.

resurrecting Glass-Steagall, like breaking up the big banks, like making sure that taxes are increased on the very wealthy and the earned income tax credit

States. A short list would include: stagnant wages; and economy making the rich richer, and ignoring most of the rest; the problem of climate change or global warming; the declining middle class; immigrant reform; entitlement reform (Medicare social security); the undermining of healthcare reform; tax reform and making the tax code fairer.

This may be an excellent time to consider whether there are any constitutional changes that could be made? Your task: identify, propose, and discuss at least THREE you would like to see made in the current U.S. constitution and explain why.

[Type text]