Tiffany Bond  🦞 🇺🇸Verified account

Regardless of what factors made that happen, it is. I agree with you very much that our system is paid off. Until we send different people it is unlikely to change. That's the closest we have to a national referendum...though we know in Maine how seriously those are taken anyway.

So you’re dropping the absurd claim that all we need is the political will to change the law? Good.

The people we have sent to Congress, in aggregate, do not have the will to change this law, and they are the ones with yhe power to do so. Not sure how that is unclear.

It’s like you have no idea of the role of the Supreme Court in our campaign finance regime and how they overturned laws that took a lot of political will to enact.

It's like I think we have an existing situation, and that situation has 2 possible remedies, different law created by legislative action, or different law created by judicial ruling. I'm not assigning a value or likelihood to either path, merely stating those are the options.

Surely you’re aware that passing campaign finance laws means nothing if the Supreme Court considers them unconstitutional.

That would be the role SCOTUS has. That leaves the legislators the option to try different reasoning/drafting, an amendment, or confirm Justices with different philosophical leanings. The remedies exist with Congress and SCOTUS, which each have different checks.

Confirm different judges? You mean under a different president, right? Trump isn’t going to nominate anyone who would overturn Citizens United.