Senate Democrats want to dismantle the First Amendment

Senate Democrats plan to hold a vote on a constitutional amendment proposed by Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) that would effectively rewrite the First Amendment to give Congress the ability to regulate political speech:

The Senate will vote on an amendment sponsored by Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) that would overturn two recent court cases that have given corporations, labor unions and wealthy individuals free rein to spend freely on federal races.

“The Supreme Court is trying to take this country back to the days of the robber barons, allowing dark money to flood our elections. That needs to stop, and it needs to stop now,” said Senate Rules Committee Chairman Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), who announced the plan.

“The only way to undo the damage the court has done is to pass Senator Udall’s amendment to the Constitution, and Senate Democrats are going to try to do that,” he said.

Schumer said the vote would take place by year’s end and called on Republican colleagues to join Democrats to ensure “the wealthy can’t drown out middle-class voices in our Democracy.”

Eyeroll. It’s gimmick, part of the populist message on which Senate Democrats are desperately trying to run as they face a tough mid-term election. It also serves to rally the party’s leftist base, which, apparently, only likes free speech when they’re the ones talking.

The amendment, which has almost no chance of passage, takes aim at two Supreme Court decisions, Citizens United (2010) and McCutcheon (2014), that have loosened campaign finance regulations and contributions limitations. These decisions were huge victories for free speech — yes, money is speech and, yes, corporations are protected by the First Amendment — though, the anti-speech left lost their collective minds over them.

Allowing Congress to pass more restrictive campaign finance laws comes with strings attached. Yeah, this is coming with a populist line, but it’s really about government control of what outside groups can and can’t say. Or, in other words, it’s about incumbent protection.

The views and opinions expressed by individual authors are not necessarily those of other authors, advertisers, developers or editors at United Liberty.