867

Summary

House Democrats, led by Rep. Pramila Jayapal, introduced the We the People Amendment to overturn Citizens United, aiming to curb corporate influence in elections.

The constitutional amendment asserts that constitutional rights apply only to individuals, not corporations, and mandates full disclosure of political contributions.

Jayapal cited Elon Musk’s massive campaign spending and subsequent financial gains as proof of the ruling’s harm.

Advocacy groups praised the move, calling it necessary to combat corporate power and dark money in politics, but Republicans have not backed the proposal.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] andxz@lemmy.world 20 points 6 days ago

Way too little, way too late.

[-] Freefall@lemmy.world 11 points 6 days ago

To late, but DO IT!!

finally something actually based, this would be such a good amendment.

[-] Gointhefridge@lemm.ee 163 points 1 week ago

This is one of the single biggest changes we can make to our current electoral system.

Should’ve done this in 2021. This could’ve changed the 2024 election entirely.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 36 points 1 week ago

What did they do in 2021 instead?

Probably nothing else going on really. They're just lazy and fat off corporate cash piles, obviously.

[-] Gointhefridge@lemm.ee 42 points 1 week ago

Nothing. That’s the problem. Democrats are so afraid to play an opposition party cause it will negatively affect party leadership and top donors. They want the status quo and are more than likely benefiting from the Trump regime in many ways.

Make no bones about it: top Democrats have been complacent with a hostile takeover of the US government because it is benefiting them.

Progressive Democrats and party newcomers are seeing this reality. They tried to play the game for a bit but got burned like Bernie did. Some democrats are finally growing a backbone to stand up against geriatric party leadership.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 21 points 1 week ago

Biden could have arrested Trump on January 21st, and that would have been that

[-] edg@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago

There was less than a 0٪ chance that they could have passed a constitutional ammendment in 2021.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[-] fbn@slrpnk.net 114 points 1 week ago

would have been more useful when you had any kind of power to get a bill passed, but thanks anyway i guess

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 84 points 1 week ago

Stow that shit. This is exactly what they need to be doing. They need to make the argument to the American people that they have better ideas and a better plan for America, and then create a voting record for Congress so they can beat them in the next election. Of course it won't pass, but if they give up without even trying, then the Nazis can act like they are the only option.

[-] fbn@slrpnk.net 44 points 1 week ago

I agree, but i aint gonna stow it. Why didnt they introduce it when they were able to maybe pass it? Im not going to refrain from criticizing them just because worse people are in power.

[-] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

when they were able to maybe pass it?

Lmfao when was this? A constitutional amendment of any kind has zero chance of getting passed by anyone and hasn't in the entire time the Citizens United ruling has existed.

Democrats around that time could barely muster enough votes from the Republicans to pass the milquetoast, conservative ACA via simple majority. You're deluded if you think Democrats ever could've plausibly reversed Citizens United via amendment.

load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (10 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Melatonin@lemmy.dbzer0.com 64 points 1 week ago

So they throw this impossible task out there, something they can put all their energy and rhetoric into which will ultimately not bear results in my lifetime, and they can say see I was fighting against this tyranny.

This is such a bald-face transparent PR move I hope everyone sees it for what it is.

[-] SGGeorwell@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago

They’ve had multiple chances to fix this when they had real power. They’re idiots.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 24 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

They’re idiots

They're idiots, or.. they are insincere.

The reality that people who vote Democrat loyally, especially white, middle income, NPR listening, card carrying liberals, need to come to terms with is this:

The Democratic party doesn't work for you.

The leadership of the Democratic party, it's party managers, the ones who hold real power: they do not share your same interests. It's always been performative. The vast majority of Democrats never meant any of it. The few that do are refused any real leadership or power. Every time they've had the votes to do something, anything, there is always a technical or procedural excuse. And when they now the thing can't pass, they use the opportunity to show their bonafide: precisely when it has no cost. The current political situation were in would be impossible without the weakness and persistent cuckoldry coming from the Democratic party.

It's a waste of time to invest further in the Democratic party. They were never going to come to your rescue, now less than ever when they are most needed. American leftist already knows this, it's time for the American liberal to develop a sense of shame at their unwillingness to oppose the baseless, performative bullshit they've come to accept as politics from the DNC.

We need a new political project. The DNC is cooked.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

“But they didn’t have a 90 seat advantage in the Senate and 400 house seats and the presidency!!! How do you expect them to get anything done without that?!?” - centrists

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Chocrates@lemmy.world 60 points 1 week ago

Jfc. They and both houses of Congress multiple times since Citizens United and didn't do shit. Bringing it up now, when it won't even get through Congress, let alone the states, is a fucking distraction

[-] edg@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago

Even then they never had the support to pass this or any constitutional ammendment.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 51 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Wow so brave. \s \s \s

Seriously tho. These people are phony AF. They had 4 years to actually do this. This is just political theater.

[-] dukeofdummies@lemmy.world 19 points 1 week ago

I mean, they had 14 years didn't they?

Have they ever tried to pass an ammendment for this?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Semi_Hemi_Demigod@lemmy.world 50 points 1 week ago

It is with a sense of similar urgency that I am proposing an amendment to make every Thursday a national holiday.

Like the Democrats, I also do not have any power to enact this, let alone enforce it, but the important part is that I proposed something impossible instead of actually doing literally anything to stop this.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] VeryVito@lemmy.ml 48 points 1 week ago

Good, but why the hell didn’t they do this when they had control of Congress?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] jaggedrobotpubes@lemmy.world 41 points 1 week ago

Do this and keep doing it until it works. This isn't a moonshot. It's normal, sensible change. Everybody shut your fucking mouths with all this secondary "it isn't going to work now" bitch energy. Get behind the shit you want, loudly.

[-] Wes4Humanity@lemm.ee 39 points 1 week ago

Absolutely disingenuous to report this as "house Dems", as though the liberal (i.e. conservative) Dems are in on it. They are not. These are progressive Dems who propose this basically every year, and who are actually fighting for us, not corporations and profits. Liberal Dems then work with their Republican friends to shut it down. This is why liberal Dems are as much the enemy as the Republicans.

[-] RufusFirefly@lemmy.world 38 points 1 week ago

Instead of throwing shit at the wall and seeing what sticks, immediately get rid of the gerontocracy (Schumer, Pelosi), regroup, find a leader with some balls and declare open warfare on Republicans. It's not like there isn't any ammunition.

Exactly, the conservatives have spent the last 40 years gradually doing exactly this and the Democrats have spent the last 40 years denying that reality and laughing off the right wing, talk show type populists while they slowly took control of the GOP and the court system.

immediately get rid of the gerontocracy (Schumer, Pelosi), regroup, find a leader with some balls and declare open warfare on Republicans.

to be fair, this is probably exactly what republicans want to be able to pull the entire curtain down.

[-] Bosht@lemmy.world 31 points 1 week ago

Yeah, the sole reason they're suggesting it now is because they know it's too little too late. It will go nowhere and we all know this, them Dems will be like 'oh but we tried!' Fucking useless.

[-] Treczoks@lemmy.world 27 points 1 week ago

Long overdue, and probably too late.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] blindbunny@lemmy.ml 24 points 1 week ago

Would have been a lot cooler if Biden did this as a executive action. But you know spinless Democrats and all that...

[-] Sauerkraut@discuss.tchncs.de 17 points 1 week ago

But that would have upset the capital class and Biden is a proud capitalist so he would never put democracy before profits. Liberal Democrats only ever do things when they know that they don't have to worry about it actually happening.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Australis13@fedia.io 20 points 1 week ago

I can't quite decide if this is just virtue signalling or not from the Democrats. I know some of them would genuinely support it, but this feels very much like it is too little, too late - if they were actually serious about saving democracy in the US, they could have done this when it actually stood a chance of being useful.

[-] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 20 points 1 week ago

Dipshits: Dems are just as bad! They don't want to change the system!

Dems: *prove again they want to change the system*

Dipshits: Oh yeah? Well . . . why didn't they do it already then?!?!

[-] Yggnar@lemmy.world 39 points 1 week ago

Genuinely, why didn't they? Why didnt they do it when they had both the house and Senate? Are you somehow deluded into thinking this will actually go anywhere with the Republicans holding as much power as they currently are? This is just virtue signaling.

load more comments (18 replies)
[-] HighFructoseLowStand@lemm.ee 18 points 1 week ago

Do the people in these comment sections not grasp how Constitutional amendments work?

It requires two thirds of the Senate. Which Democrats have not had in the past half century.

That is why Democrats didn't try it when they had a majority. Because it would not work.

People really just want an excuse to blame Democrats for everything.

[-] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 15 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

It's far more complicated than that to get an amendment passed including a route that doesn't require Congress.

Second, there is value in trying things that will fail. It sends a signal to the citizenry that this isn't acceptable. This can be a good just as much as it can damage their reputation. In my opinion, the Dems need to rebuild a reputation that is connected to the people in some meaningful way. I don't get the sense that Democratic leadership see that as the core issue

load more comments (5 replies)
load more comments (2 replies)
[-] Tronn4@lemmy.world 17 points 1 week ago

Now they ask for this? After having zero majority in either house? Acter letting a nazi waltz into the white house?

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] eran_morad@lemmy.world 16 points 1 week ago

John Roberts is a traitor to this country.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Kalysta@lemm.ee 16 points 1 week ago

Wouldn’t it be nice if they did shit like this when they were actually in power?

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Alwaysnownevernotme@lemmy.world 14 points 1 week ago
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] shaggyb@lemmy.world 13 points 1 week ago

Yes. Suture up that corpse.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 14 Feb 2025
867 points (100.0% liked)

politics

20345 readers
2722 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.

Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.

Example:

  1. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  2. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  3. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
  4. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  5. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS