79% in Massachusetts say it’s time to amend the Constitution

79% in Massachusetts say it’s time to amend the Constitution

The Massachusetts race for U.S. Senate is historic for two reasons. First, it resulted in the election of the first ever woman senator from Massachusetts. Second, it was the most expensive contest for a Senate seat ever. The two candidates spent a combined $70 million!

But if the vote for Elizabeth Warren was a clear, the vote against all of the money spent in her race and races across the country was even clearer. One million Massachusetts voters had the opportunity to vote on the Democracy Amendment Question, which calls for a constitutional amendment that would allow Congress and the states to limit political spending and affirm that corporations do not have constitutional rights, and 79% of them said yes.

Though largely spared from the $1.3 billion of outside spending unleashed by the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United this election cycle, Massachusetts voters, and their counterparts in Colorado, Montana, and dozens of cities across the country, sent an unequivocal message that they are fed up with money in politics and want a fundamental overhaul of the system. They understand that despite what the Supreme Court has said in Citizens United, and other earlier decisions, money is not protected speech under the 1st Amendment and corporations should not have the same rights as ‘we the people.’

And this was not just a liberal or conservative issue. Support was truly trans-partisan and cut across Democrat and Republican Party lines. Cities and towns in Cape, Essex, and Norfolk Counties that supported Senator Brown and Mitt Romney also supported the Democracy Amendment Question in large numbers. The same is true about neighborhoods in Boston, Middlesex County, and Western Massachusetts that supported President Obama and Elizabeth Warren.

Now that the voters of Massachusetts have spoken it’s time for our elected leaders to get to work on a constitutional amendment that restores a government of, by and for the people, not of, by, and for corporations and country’s wealthiest individuals.

This post was written by

108 Comments on "79% in Massachusetts say it’s time to amend the Constitution"

  • Tom Sciacca says

    In my town of Wayland about 20% voted AGAINST the question. I thought it was because Wayland is so affluent that some actually wanted to use their money to buy elections. But now I see that our vote was typical. Any idea who voted against? I just don’t understand who would be for Citizen’s United except the 1%!

    • Tyler Creighton says

      Given the fact that I many people did not know about this question until seeing it on the ballot, 80% is quite good. The purpose of the ballot question campaign was to demonstrate overwhelming support for a constitutional amendment as well as make voters aware of this issue. I believe we succeeded on both of these fronts.

      As for those voting against it. Some people initially believe that point (1) corporations do not have the same constitutional rights as people is anti-corporate and don’t fully grasp the legal fiction espoused by the current Court. Point (1) is not anti-corporate but simply reaffirms the original intent of the Constitution: to protect the rights of people, not the rights of a legal entity that only exists by state charter. Others believe that (2) Congress and the states can limit political spending restricts free speech, failing to recognize that money is property not speech and that unlimited spending by a few undermines the free speech rights of everybody else. Moreover, they do not see other compelling state interests in limiting campaign finance such as an interest in preventing corruption.

      Both (1) and (2) are complicated issues that require thorough explanations. We should build off our success at the ballot box and continue to educate the public on these two important issues. I hope you will join us.

Leave Your Comment