The D.C. donor class doesn’t represent the diversity of Washington D.C.’s population, a new Demos report finds. In Washington D.C.’s 2014 mayoral election, large donors (those who gave more than $1,000) accounted for 67 percent of all money raised by the three candidates in 2014.
The 2016 presidential election is dominated by big money – with close to half of all Super PAC money coming from just 50 donors. When wealthy, white donors set the agenda each election season, whose voices are left unheard?
The Brennan Center for Justice, Demos and The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights invite you to engage in a thought-provoking and timely discussion about how the outsized influence of big money in politics may be a 21st Century civil rights issue and what we can do about it.
The University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online has released a Special Issue on Campaign Finance exploring alternatives to the Supreme Court’s analysis in Buckley vs. Valeo, the foundational money in politics case decided 40 years ago this year.
In May, the University of Pennsylvania Law Review Online will publish a series of essays examining the role that political equality could play in the Supreme Court’s campaign finance jurisprudence. The authors in this collection are helping to relaunch a conversation that has been stagnant for forty years.
A newly released report provides the first-ever comprehensive study of how municipal level elections and policymaking are dominated by big donors. How Chicago’s White Donor Class Distorts City Policy shows that in the 2015 Chicago mayoral election, candidates raised more than 90 percent of their funds from donors giving over $1,000.
Today President Obama fulfilled his constitutional duty by nominating Judge Merrick Garland to succeed Justice Antonin Scalia on the U.S. Supreme Court. Now the question is whether U.S. Senators will do their jobs.
Demos Vice President of Policy and Legal Strategies Brenda Wright released the following statement:
"Tonight, in his last State of the Union, President Obama lifted up the importance of fixing our politics so that all voices can be heard in our democracy.
"He noted how too many people feel that 'the system is rigged in favor of the rich or the powerful or some narrow interest.' To live up to our democratic tenets, President Obama called for reducing the influence of money in politics and modernizing our elect
Sec. Hillary Clinton correctly noted the importance of the next president’s power to appoint Supreme Court justices. On no issue is this more true than on money in politics.
Although the Paris Climate Deal certainly represents a step forward for the international community, there are still many potential pitfalls to addressing climate change. New data suggest that the overwhelmingly white donor class may be one such obstacle.
“For let it be agreed that a government is republican in proportion as every member composing it has an equal voice in the direction of its concerns…” Thomas Jefferson Letter to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816
Buckley v. Valeo is a January 30, 1976 Supreme Court case that struck down key pieces of Congress’ post-Watergate money in politics reforms, and set the structure of modern campaign finance law.
Next year won’t just mark the most expensive and big money-dominated election in U.S. history--it is also the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court case that set the basic structure of campaign finance law. In Buckley at 40, Demos Counsel and Senior Advisor Adam Lioz examines how 1976’s Buckley v. Valeo launched a vicious cycle of political, economic, and racial inequality that endures today.
As the Republican presidential candidates gather tonight, it’s worth noting where they’re debating. Sheldon and Miriam Adelson, the biggest outside spenders in the 2012 election, own the casino where CNN will host the debate, and have been meeting with several of the candidates to decide who to endorse. They’ll certainly be watching tonight.
Last Wednesday a mass shooting in San Bernardino, the 355th this year, prompted a debate about the need for gun control. In an incredibly rare decision, the New York Times ran a front-page editorial calling for gun control.