Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0445.004 2014-2016PlcouwaL c�nru . 445 GOUN'TY CLERK Murashige, Laura P,Q- 1 W-; V ,, - U AMA „ From: Marvin Feldman <marvinfeldman@hawaii.rr.com> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 2015 11:45 AM 2015 SEP - I PH 12= 1A To: Council Testimony Subject: Support for Resolutions 266-15 and 267-15 Hawaii County Council: I am writing on behalf of the Kona Affiliate of Move to Amend, a non-profit grass-roots organization dedicated to amending the U.S. Constitution to declare that money is not speech and that corporation are not persons. The U.S. Constitution begins with the words "We the people of the United States..." It is essential the will of the people be expressed by our government. Increasingly our government is under the control of corporate and moneyed interests. Only a "We the People" amendment" to the Constitution can reverse this trend. Summary: Move to Amend wholehearted endorses Resolutions 266-15 and 267-15. These measures are very well drafted and make clear the distinction between the rights of natural persons guaranteed by the Constitution and privileges accorded to corporations. Corporations, which are not entitled to the rights of natural persons guaranteed in the Constitution. Furthermore, it is essential to the democratic functioning of our electoral systems that states and the federal government retain the ability to set restrictions on funding of elections. Although corporations were never granted any Constitution rights, nor was money equated to free speech in the Constitution, more than a century of case law has accumulated which establishes corporate personhood and equates free speech with unlimited campaign funding by individuals and corporations. It will require a Constitutional amendment to reverse these precedents and again place the People in control of our democracy. Legislative History of the call for amendment: Hawaii was the first state to respond to the misguided Citizens United decision in which the U.S, Supreme Court, in a 5 to 4 decision, ruled that corporations were entitled to spend unlimited funds to influence elections. In 2010, soon after the Citizens United decision, the Hawaii Legislature passed HCR 282 calling on Congress to pass a Constitutional Amendment to limit campaign spending by corporations. HCR 282 called on Congress to pass an amendment "...preserving the power of Congress and the States to place limits on the ability of corporations to influence the outcome of elections through political expenditures." While helpful, this Resolution did not go far enough in preserving the ability of States and Congress to limit election spending by other entities. The limitations of HCR 282 became apparent in the 2014 McCutcheon v. FEC Supreme Court decision, which struck down limits on spending by individuals. This would not have been covered by the amendment called for in HCR 282. In 2012 this Council passed Resolution 263 which, like HCR 282, called on Congress to overturn Citizens United and to correct the mistaken notion of corporate personhood. However it did not address the general issue of restoring the states' and Congress's ability to limit any form of election spending (i.e. to declare that money is property, not speech). Also in 2012, then Councilwoman Tulsi Gabbard introduced Resolution 12-207 to the Honolulu City Council calling on Congress to ratify an amendment which ends the false doctrine of corporate personhood and clarifying that money is property and not speech and campaign spending can be limited by overnment. This Comm. Pte. 6. 5� - O` 1 Ref. To: Ck -Ref. Date .CFP 6 Resolution was passed unanimously. Subsequently, earlier this year, Kaua'i County Council passed a resolution modeled on the Honolulu resolution. Maui County has a very similar resolution under active consideration. The resolutions under consideration by this Council are likewise closely modeled on the Honolulu and Kaua'i resolutions. HCR 53 was introduced in the Hawaii House of Representatives 28th Legislature earlier this year. That bill, calling for a constitutional convention, died in the Judiciary Committee due to the Chairman's concern about a runaway Convention. For the same reason, Move to Amend does not favor the Constitution Convention approach at this time (see section below). At the federal level, HJR 48 was introduced in Congress in April of this year. It calls for a constitution amendment to declare that Congress and the states have the authority to control campaign spending and that corporations are not entitled to the constitutional rights of natural persons. Process to Amend the US Constitution: An amendment has to be proposed either by a 2/3 vote of both houses of Congress, or else by a Section 5 constitutional convention, convened when the legislatures of 2/3 of the states so request. The amendment has to be ratified either by the legislatures of 3/4 of the states, or by conventions in 3/4 of the states, depending on which means of ratification Congress proposes. All of the current amendments to the Constitution, of which there are now 27, were proposed by Congress, and all but one were ratified by state legislatures. The convention route has never been used for proposing an amendment, and was used only once for ratifying an amendment (the 21 st, which eliminated Prohibition). There is some debate among legal scholars as to whether a constitutional convention can be limited to a specified issue. This uncertainty is the reason why Move to Amend favors the 2/3 of Congress route. Hawaii actions needed to support the Constitutional Amendment: Obtaining the approval of 2/3 of Congress for the currently proposed HJR 48 or any similar bill is clearly an uphill battle. Congress is largely under the control of the corporate and moneyed interests which pay for their campaigns but who do not represent the will of the people. Only a concerted multi-year effort on the part of state and local governments and grassroots organizing can convince Congress to pass a "We the People Amendment". Electoral reform is a non-partisan issue that, according to polls ( http://www.citizen.org/documents/Memo.CitizensUnited.frev.pdf) has the strong support of Democrats, Republicans and independents. Passage of these Resolutions, and subsequent passage of a call for a Constitutional Amendment by the Hawaii Legislature will be an important step toward restoring our democracy. Passage of Resolution 266 will put Hawaii County on record as supporting the necessary Constitutional Amendment. Resolution 267 will direct HSAC to voice the approval of all Hawaii Counties on the Amendment issue. This will in turn provide the impetus for the Hawaii Legislature to strengthen its call for a Constitutional amendment to be passed by Congress. Representative Nicole Lowen has agreed to sponsor such a bill in the Hawaii House of Representatives. I urge passage of Resolutions 266 and 267. Respectfully, Marvin Feldman, Chair Kona Move to Amend Affiliate