The problem of American democracy isn't solely that there's too much money in our politics. It's that the money comes from a narrow (and extremely rich) slice of the electorate.

The Wall Street Journal ran a disingenuous and misleading opinion piece on Sunday evening titled "The Corporate Disclosure Assault," arguing that “[u]nions and liberal activists are using proxy rules to attack business political speech.” The piece—exactly like the undisclosed corporate money it’s

How Citizens Union decision has given an even greater voice to the wealthy who do not always have the same priorities as the rest of America.

Republicans voters aren’t hugely enthusiastic about any of their choices because they didn't choose these candidates — donors did.

Eliza Carney has an interesting piece in Roll Call observing that in light of Congressional inaction, several federal agencies have now moved to center stage in the fight over unrestricted campaign money.

The more we learn about Super PACs, the uglier the picture gets.

Yesterday’s House oversight committee h earing on contraception was far from productive.

In 1907, Congress banned corporate contributions to federal candidates in the wake of the robber baron-era scandals. In 1947, the ban was formally applied to corporate expenditures and extended to cover labor unions.

NYPIRG released a report last week of the largest donations in New York state politics over the past year. The numbers, while no longer surprising, mirror the disturbing state of campaign spending at the federal level, and they raise some important questions about the underlying institutions

Earlier today, Demos, along with a broad coalition of organizations, asset management groups, and elected officials sent a letter to the Senate Banking Committee calling for a public hearing to consider corporate governance solutions to Citizens United.