By Deb Hogshead 

Guest columnist

Published in local newspaper, Miami Valley Today, on July 7

"Together, we must restore the essence of democracy envisioned by the Founders by reevaluating the relationship between wealth and politics. A revolutionary overhaul of campaign finance laws is crucial. Public financing of elections, greater transparency in political donations, and prohibiting the use of 'dark money' … are critical."

—Chris Gibbs

In his June 20 column, Chris Gibbs did a great job describing our pay-to-play system of government and the steps needed to make sure our elected representatives are genuinely accountable to we the people, rather than to the wealthy donor class and mammoth corporations.

I agree.

To make his suggested solutions stick and prevail when challenged in court, however, we must amend the U.S. Constitution.

Foundational to the change we need is the We the People Amendment, House Joint Resolution 54 in the current Congress. This proposed amendment will make two things clear: (1) money spent on political campaigns is not protected speech and shall be regulated at all levels of government, and (2) inherent, inalienable rights belong to natural persons only, not to corporate entities created through a state chartering process.

Without this amendment, new campaign finance laws could very well be struck down as “unconstitutional.” The Supreme Court ruled in 1976 that money spent on political campaign messages is protected speech (Buckley v. Valeo). In 2010, it struck down part of the 2002 McCain-Feingold Act, giving rise to Super PACs and flooding even more money into political campaigns (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission). Then on June 30 of this year, the court struck down a post-Watergate law limiting fundraising and spending by political parties (National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission).

But it’s not just money in politics that should concern us. Over the years, the Supreme Court has granted corporate entities constitutional rights, rights that should be reserved for natural persons only. Besides ruling that a corporation has a 1st Amendment right to influence elections, the court has also decided a corporation has a 1st Amendment right to NOT speak, that is, to hide information it doesn’t want to share; a 4th Amendment right to refuse surprise public health inspections without a warrant; a 5th Amendment right to sue for future profits lost if a municipality places restrictions on its business; and a 14th Amendment right to equal protection under the law.

With these so-called “constitutional” rights, a large corporation, with lots of money and the best lawyers, can make a lot trouble for local communities trying to protect public welfare, but lacking the financial resources to do battle in court.

Yes, of course, a corporation should have privileges, protections from government overreach, and statutory rights. As a creation of the state, however, a corporation should never have inherent, inalienable “constitutional” rights same as you and me.

For folks who say it’s too hard and takes too long to pass a constitutional amendment, consider the following.

We can take interim steps. For example, the Transparent Election Initiative (aka, the Montana Plan), is a citizen ballot measure that, when passed, will curb corporate political spending through a change in state law that creates corporations. Hawaii did this recently through a bill passed in the state legislature and signed by the governor. In 2024, Maine voters passed a ballot initiative banning Super PACs. All are critical interim steps, but they don’t address all the challenges associated with money in politics and so-called corporate constitutional rights. And they’re already being challenged in court.

It’s also important to remember that just because something is hard, or takes a long time, doesn’t mean it’s impossible or unworthy of our attention and effort. We all sit in the shade of a tree we didn’t plant. It took 72 years to ratify the 19th Amendment, which gave women the right to vote. It took more than 200 years to pass the 27th Amendment, which stipulates that increases in congressional pay cannot be implemented until after the next election of House members.

Let’s work for the changes Chris recommends. And let’s ensure they’re permanent by getting the We the People Amendment passed in both chambers of Congress and ratified by 38 states.

The writer is a Troy resident and a volunteer with Move to Amend Miami County.