By Elyse Apel
The Center Square

Democratic lawmakers in four states have proposed a constitutional amendment to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

That 2010 ruling allowed corporations, unions and special interest groups to spend unlimited money on political communications, as long as the spending is independent from a candidate’s campaign. Prior to that, such funding was limited.

U.S. Rep. Joe Neguse, D-Colorado, announced his support for the amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Neguse joined other U.S. House Democrats in proposing the bill “Citizens Over Corporations Amendment.”

Supporters of the amendment, which also includes lawmakers in California, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania, argue the Supreme Court’s decision “unleashed a flood of political corruption.”

“I’m teaming up … to introduce a constitutional amendment that would overturn this disastrous ruling and get dark money out of our government,” Neguse said.

The bill’s sponsors also include U.S. Reps. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts and Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, both Democrats.

U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff, D-California, proposed the Senate version of the bill.

“The Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United opened the door for corporations to pour billions of dollars of dark money into elections,” Schiff said. “This anonymous and unrestricted spending cripples transparency in the political process and weakens our democracy. Our amendment will keep big money out of politics and restore power where it should belong — with the American people.”

The amendment would, among other things:

• Allow Congress and states to set limits on the raising and spending of campaign finances.

• Allow public (i.e. government) financing of campaigns.

The bill is endorsed by a number of groups, including End Citizens United, which has labeled the Supreme Court’s decision “disastrous.”

“Citizens United has turned our democracy into a government that serves the ultra-wealthy,” said ECU Action Fund President Tiffany Muller. “Political spending by billionaires has surged an astonishing 160-fold since the 2010 Supreme Court decision, and working families are paying the price like never before as self-enriching politicians bankroll tax breaks for their biggest donors.”

This is not the first time an amendment overturning Citizens United has been proposed. Since the Supreme Court’s decision in 2010, multiple proposed constitutional amendments have been introduced. While support for those is generally from Democrats, Republicans have occasionally backed the bills.

In general, it is very difficult to successfully pass a constitutional amendment out of Congress, as it requires a two-thirds majority of both the Senate and House. Once it is passed by Congress, it still must be ratified by 38 of the 50 states. An amendment has not done that successfully since 1992 when the 27th Amendment, regulating congressional salaries, was enacted.

Advance Colorado and the Common Sense Institute of Colorado did not have comments on the amendment. Faculty at the University of Colorado Law School also did not respond to emails from The Center Square for comment.