It’s time conservatives admit it: Citizens United broke states’ rights
Conservatives have spent years claiming Washington holds too much power. We make this argument about education, land use, energy, healthcare, elections, you name it. A republic of 50 sovereign states wasn’t built for every political disagreement to end with Washington’s decision. Utah should run itself like Utah. Montana should get to be Montana.
TL;DR
- Conservatives often argue for states' rights and limited federal power, but campaign finance rulings, like Citizens United, have limited states' authority to regulate political spending.
- Citizens United ruled that the government cannot block independent political spending by corporations or unions, though disclosure requirements remain.
- The Supreme Court's decision in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission further limited federal limits on political parties' coordinated expenditures.
- Montana's attempt to enforce its own law restricting corporate political spending after Citizens United was overturned by the U.S. Supreme Court.
- The author, a candidate for the Utah House, highlights the issue of 'dark money' from undisclosed donors influencing local elections.
- Strengthening disclosure rules and anti-circumvention measures could provide voters with more information about who is financing political speech.
- An amendment, like the proposed For Our Freedom Amendment, could grant Congress and state legislatures constitutional authority to reasonably regulate campaign contributions and spending, allowing for distinctions between natural persons and artificial entities.