Displaying 1 - 20 of 37 results
We support rulemaking to require public companies to disclose to shareholders the use of corporate resources for political activities.
We write to urge you to reject President Trump’s nomination of Judge Neil Gorsuch to a lifetime appointment on the nation’s highest court.
The Supreme Court got it supremely wrong when it held that corporations had the same rights as people to spend money in elections.
14 Big Ideas to Build a Strong & Diverse Middle Class
Public financing of elections, as a state and local democracy reform, can help enhance the political voice and power of working-class people and people of color. It is an effective antidote to the outsized influence corporations and major donors currently have on both politics and policy.
Why we need an executive order requiring government contractors to disclose their political spending.
In 2012, just 61 large donors to Super PACs giving an average of $4.7 million each matched the $285.2 million in grassroots contributions from more than 1,425,500 small donors to the major party presidential candidates.
Outside spending organizations reported $1.11 billion in spending to the FEC through the final reporting deadline in the 2012 cycle. That’s already a 200% increase over total 2008 outside spending.
Americans of all political backgrounds agree: there is way too much corporate money in politics.
This memo outlines how the Justices lined up on the issues in Randall v. Sorrell, provides some analysis of the opinions, and touches on the implications for future reform efforts.
Dēmos has measured the comparative effectiveness of five leading fiscal proposals. We evaluate the plans in eight categories: jobs and public investment; health care affordability; Social Security income; education; defense policy; fair and adequate revenues; and long-term debt reduction.
Answers to 8 frequently asked questions.
Signed into law on May 22, 2009, the Credit CARD Act has benefited millions of households in ways that directly affect their monthly budgets.
After getting the First Amendment supremely wrong in Citizens United, the Supreme Court now faces its next money in politics case. In McCutcheon v. FEC, the challengers are attacking a law that says that no one person can contribute over $123,000 directly to federal candidates, parties, and committees—that’s over twice the average American’s income.
H.R. 1, the For the People Act, is the boldest and most comprehensive proposal to strengthen our democracy since the aftermath of Watergate.
"We know this: the super rich and corporations don’t need a tax cut. The 1 percent are doing just fine."
"With the Supreme Court split four-to-four on so many critical issues, the stakes could not be higher."
Thank you for this opportunity to submit testimony regarding the damage that Citizens United and the rise of Super PACs has done to our system of democratic government. In the text below I will discuss why rules that govern the role of money in politics are important to our democracy; the impact of Citizens United and related decisions on our electoral system; and what Congress can and must do to promote the core American value of political equality.
Testimony of Demos' Democracy Program Legal Director on restoring contribution limits in Vermont, delivered before the Vermont House Government Operations Committee on February 5, 2008.
Testimony of Democracy Program Director Brenda Wright before the Boston City Council on Campaign Finance Reform