I am writing today to announce the closure of the New Mexico Independent. After three and a half years of operation in New Mexico, the board of the American Independent News Network, has decided to shift publication of its news…
While environmental activists played their part yesterday during demonstrations at the capitol building, going so far as to dress up as solar panels and to sing the tune of “You Are My Sunshine,” their counterparts, the anti-cap-and-trade contingency who has…
Roughly one quarter of University of New Mexico students are unimpressed with the state’s flagship public school, according to a survey that questioned college students about their higher education experiences.
Sens. Tom Udall, D-N.M., and Chris Dodd, D-Conn., have introduced a constitutional amendment to reverse the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling, which allows corporations and unions to spend unlimited money on independent political expenditures.
“The Supreme Court’s decision to encourage the corrosive effects special interest money is having on the election process fundamentally contradicts the American ideal that campaigns should be about the best ideas and not the biggest bank accounts,” Udall said in a statement released Wednesday.
The amendment was introduced by Dodd, who is retiring after this election cycle, but Udall is an original cosponsor.
The constitutional amendment would allow Congress to regulate how money for federal races is raised and spent, including independent expenditures which are at the heart of the Citizens United decision. It would also allow states to regulate such spending at their level.
“I am a firm believer in the sanctity of the First Amendment, and I believe we must continue to do all we can to protect the free speech rights of the American people. But I strongly disagree with the Supreme Court’s conclusion that money is speech, and that corporations should be treated the same as individual Americans when it comes to protected, fundamental speech rights,” said Dodd.
Some commentators have said that the Citzens United ruling could work as an effective wedge issue for Democrats, much like gay marriage bans and abortion laws have served as wedge issues for Republicans.
Earlier this month, Lawrence Lessig announced his call for a Constitutional Convention to overturn the ruling.
Udall and Dodd also announced they would support legislative efforts to “blunt the Supreme Court’s ruling, ncluding increased disclosure requirements on corporate campaign spending and other efforts to further limit the influence of foreign corporations in the democratic process.”
Some states have been weighing ways to rewrite campaign finance laws after the Supreme Court decision, but New Mexico is not currently among them.
