Democrats Say Citizens United Should Die Heres Why That Wont Happen
Catastrophe seemed imminent. "In a certain real way, the republic is at stake," said Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. "We're really stress-testing our democracy in a way we never have before," said attorney Lawrence M. Noble. The menace under the microscope? "Dark money" in politics. But the doomsday scenarios played out one by one in a subterranean Capitol Hill hearing room that was far from packed, and Republicans were notably absent from the July event. The event is a metaphor for Democrats' larger battle against big and secretive political cash lots of pomp, underwhelming circumstances. Seizing on the specter of Russian election influence, they've ramped up their quixotic effort  with minimal effect  to blunt Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the controversial 2010 Supreme Court decision that unleashed a torrent of special interest spending on U.S. elections. In doing so, they've introduced two dozen bills related to money in politics. Some are aimed at increasing donor transparency, others are targeting massive contributions from special interests. A couple are intent on reforming the Federal Election Commission, the government agency charged with enforcing election laws. None, a Center for Public Integrity analysis indicates, have had a single formal hearing, much less an up-or-down vote in either the U.S. House or Senate. Election reform-minded Democrats are also hobbled by their party's recent history. When they had opportunities during President Barack Obama's first two years in office to significantly alter the American campaign finance structure through legislation, they didn't. And in a twist that's infuriated acolytes of Sen. Bernie Sanders, among others, Democrats are following Republicans' lead by raising millions of dollars in so-called "dark money" contributions, the origins of which are largely untraceable. All the while, Republicans, who now control every branch of government, have expressed little interest in stanching the ever-increasing flow of big money into federal elections. For his part, President Donald Trump, an early critic of big-moneyed interests, continues to pledge to "drain the swamp." Swamp draining, however, doesn't appear to involve political money matters, as Trump rarely addresses the issue these days. Trump's press office did not respond to multiple requests for comment., "Whether you like it or not, whether you believe in bipartisanship or not, if you don't have a strategy to attract Republican votes, you're just not going to win," said Meredith McGehee, chief of policy, programs and strategy for Issue One, a nonpartisan government accountability nonprofit. As for the package of bills the Democrats have proposed, McGehee said "It has zero chance in hell of going anywhere.", McGehee of Issue One said campaign finance reform on the federal level won't happen without bipartisan agreement  and it's not something that can accomplished overnight. She points to civil rights and smoking bans. "If I walked in the door of any Republican other than Walter Jones on the House or Senate side and I said, Hey, I want to talk about public financing,' they're going to say, Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out,'" McGehee said. "It's a nonstarter.", But if she approaches politicians to talk about how much time they feel like they have to spend raising money for their campaigns, she gets a far more enthusiastic reaction  and an opening for conversation. "It's like feeding a baby," McGehee said. "You don't give a baby steak."