Seeking to reverse a tide of money inundating politics, the Democratic-controlled California Senate on Monday called for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution limiting corporate campaign activity.
"If the only voice heard is the one with the most money," said Sen. Mark Leno, D-San Francisco, "what's become of our democracy?"
While Assembly Joint Resolution 1 does not by itself force any changes, both houses of the California Legislature have now embraced language that unequivocally pushes back on a landmark Supreme Court case equating corporate campaign spending with free speech. The 23-11 vote, with many Republicans in opposition, came the day after more than a dozen protesters were arrested at the State Capitol for demonstrating against money in politics.
The proposed amendment would narrow the doctrine of corporate personhood and would "declare that money does not constitute speech and may be legislatively limited." It states that corporations should have fewer rights than human beings, noting that corporations do not vote.
"Voters are clearly fed up, and polling shows this, with the notion that money is speech and that big money can drown out the speech of average Americans," said Sen. Mark DeSaulnier, D-Concord.
For Congress to convene a constitutional convention empowered to amend the U.S. constitution, two-thirds of state Legislatures need to be on board. The bar is even higher to ratify a proposed amendment: three quarters of states must approve.
Given that math, translating the resolution into law is a long shot. Vermont has passed a similar measure and Illinois is contemplating one, but even with the assent of those two and California 33 additional states would need to petition Congress.
PHOTO: Dozens of activists led by the grassroots organization 99Rise march up Capital Avenue after culminating a 480-mile march to protest the corrupting influence of big money in politics and staged a rally and sit-in at the State Capitol Sunday June 22, 2014 in Sacramento, Calif. The Sacramento Bee/Paul Kitagaki Jr.