[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 1]
[Senate]
[Page 1059]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




           FIVE-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF CITIZENS UNITED DECISION

  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, yesterday marked the 5-year anniversary of 
the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election 
Commission. In this sweeping opinion, on a divided 5 to 4 vote, the 
Court held that the First Amendment permitted corporations to spend 
freely from their treasuries to influence elections. As a result of 
Citizens United and the series of decisions that followed in its wake, 
we have witnessed wealthy, well-connected campaign donors and special 
interests unleash a deluge of cash in an effort to sway Federal, State, 
and local elections across our Nation.
  Let me be clear: I firmly believe that every voice should be heard in 
our country, and every perspective should have a seat at the Nation's 
policymaking table. However, Citizens United has led to a system that 
allows a privileged group of deep-pocketed donors and corporations to 
drown out the voices of ordinary citizens in an effort to buy and 
control every seat at the table.
  The numbers speak for themselves. During the last Presidential 
election, outside groups poured more than one billion dollars into 
Federal races, over three times the $338 million that outside groups 
spent in 2008. More than 93 percent of all super PAC donations in 2012 
came in contributions of at least $10,000 from 3,318 donors, who make 
up 0.0011 percent of the U.S. population. Of that group, an elite class 
of 159 people each contributed at least $1 million--funding nearly 60 
percent of all super PAC donations that year.
  We saw this trend continue during the recent midterm elections. 
Outside groups spent more than $560 million to influence 2014 Federal 
races--8 times the approximately $70 million spent in 2006, the last 
midterm election cycle before Citizens United. In 2014, we also saw a 
significant increase in political activity by tax-exempt ``dark money'' 
groups that do not publicly disclose their donors. Citizens United and 
its progeny have created a campaign finance system flush with secret 
cash and sorely lacking in transparency.
  The impact stretches from Congress to state capitols to city halls 
throughout the country. As in Federal campaigns, Citizens United has 
led to an explosion of outside spending at the State and local levels, 
with corporations and wealthy single spenders looking to play 
kingmaker, pouring cash into races for positions ranging from district 
attorney to city commissioner. One of the most startling examples last 
fall occurred in Richmond, CA, a city with a population of 107,000. 
Chevron--an energy company with more than $200 billion in annual 
revenue--spent approximately $3 million through campaign committees 
aimed at influencing the mayoral and city council races. That means 
Chevron spent at least $33 per voting-age resident in Richmond.
  While the influx of spending is well documented, I believe that the 
long- term damage to our political process from Citizens United is just 
beginning to reveal itself. Some scandals have already emerged, and 
there will doubtlessly be more stories of corruption and corrosive 
influence ahead. As a result, the public confidence in our government 
will continue to erode.
  I have worked with my colleagues on a number of solutions to address 
these concerns. Yesterday, several of these proposals were introduced 
in both the Senate and House of Representatives. I strongly support my 
colleagues in their efforts to improve disclosure and create a more 
transparent campaign finance system, and I will continue my efforts to 
establish a public financing system for Congressional elections through 
the Fair Elections Now Act, which I plan to reintroduce soon.
  We also must continue to push for a constitutional amendment that 
would protect and restore the First Amendment by overturning Citizens 
United and empowering Congress and State legislatures to set 
reasonable, content neutral limitations on campaign spending. Last 
year, as the Chairman of the Subcommittee on the Constitution, Civil 
Rights, and Human Rights, I was proud to preside over a hearing and a 
vote on Senator Udall's Democracy for All amendment. A majority of the 
Senate voted in favor of the bill, but not enough to defeat a 
Republican filibuster. We will continue to pursue this amendment and 
work toward its ultimate ratification.
  As I said last year, supporting a constitutional amendment to reform 
our campaign finance system was not a decision I came to lightly. There 
is a very high bar for amending the Constitution and that is exactly 
the way it should be. In fact, Senator Udall's amendment was the only 
constitutional amendment that the Constitution Subcommittee approved 
during my time as chairman. But I believe it is necessary to clean up 
our campaign finance system once and for all. Only a constitutional 
amendment can fully undo the damage of Citizens United and ensure that 
elections are a contest of the best ideas--not just the ideas of 
multimillionaires and corporate titans.
  In the 5 years since Citizens United was decided, we have watched the 
corrosive influence of special interest money grow. It crosses the 
political spectrum, with wealthy donors vying for influence and streams 
of secret cash emerging from both the right and the left. Meanwhile, 
everyday Americans struggle for their voices to be heard amidst the 
endless ads blanketing the airwaves, so often financed by corporate 
interests.
  As Justice Rehnquist once noted, corporations are granted the 
advantages of perpetual life, property ownership, and limited liability 
``to enhance [their] efficiency as an economic entity.'' But he went on 
to say that ``those properties, so beneficial in the economic sphere, 
pose special dangers in the political sphere.'' While some First 
Amendment protections have rightfully been extended beyond everyday 
Americans to corporations, Citizens United went too far. Living, 
breathing Americans face challenges and have concerns that are very 
different than those faced by corporations--and their resources pale in 
comparison.
  The special dangers of corporate influence in elections have never 
been more evident. The Supreme Court should fully examine the impact 
and effects of Citizens United and consider its damaging consequences 
as future cases involving campaign finance come before the Court. In 
the meantime, I will work with my colleagues to continue our 
legislative efforts to fix America's campaign finance system and 
overturn Citizens United so that elected officials listen to the 
everyday Americans who elected them--not just the wealthy donors and 
special interests that bankrolled their success.

                          ____________________