opinion

Townsend: Reform needed to take big money out of politics

Money overwhelms our elections and democracy. Whether spent by large organizations or tremendously wealthy individuals, and whether spent anonymously or transparently, this flood of money undermines Americans' faith in our political system. From seeing endless streams of attack ads, to now seeing politicians openly accept millions of dollars from individual donors, it is no surprise that most Americans support serious reform.

Unfortunately, recent decisions by the U.S. Supreme Court limit our ability to reverse this flood of money and restore faith in our republic. Amending the U.S. Constitution is our only meaningful option. Although the worst examples of money in politics arise outside of Delaware, we are not immune to the fallout. The Delaware General Assembly can do its part to promote essential reform by passing Senate Concurrent Resolution 6.

SCR 6 is a bipartisan call for a convention to amend the U.S. Constitution so that Congress and state legislatures can develop more reasonable limits on the role of money in politics. Article V of the Constitution requires at least 34 states to seek a convention before one will be convened. Four of Delaware's sister states have already made the call: Vermont, California, Illinois, and (just last week) New Jersey. More than a dozen other states are in the process of considering resolutions. Delaware should join those states and the strong majority of Americans in supporting campaign finance reform.

People have asked me how an Article V convention would work, given that one has never actually occurred. Before addressing that question, I note that I do not believe one ultimately would occur. The most likely outcome of states joining together to pass resolutions like SCR 6 is that Congress will be pressured to act. We have seen this before. The 17th Amendment (which requires U.S. Senators to be elected directly by voters instead of by state legislatures) was a product of states calling for a convention. Before the magic number of 34 states was met, Congress decided to propose the 17th Amendment itself.

Some members of Congress have tried to address Americans' concerns. Last year, Delaware's Senators – Tom Carper and Chris Coons – both cosponsored and voted to bring a proposed amendment before the U.S. Senate for a final vote. Unfortunately, only 52 other senators joined them, short of the 60 votes needed to overcome a filibuster. In the U.S. House, Delaware's Congressman – John Carney – filed a proposed amendment. Similarly, it did not advance, and Congressman Carney has filed another resolution this year. I commend all three members of Delaware's delegation for their efforts. By passing SCR 6, the Delaware General Assembly would pressure more of Senator Carper, Senator Coons, and Congressman Carney's colleagues to join their call to action.

As to how a convention would work, Article V does not speak about convention rules. I have faith that 34 (or more) states would send delegates who will establish rules for productive discussion and debate. Yet no matter what the rules of the convention, no amendment could be finalized at the convention. Article V clearly states that an amendment will take effect only when 38 states ratify it back home. It is not the case that calling a convention would suddenly mean large states like California or New York have more voting power than Delaware. True to our federal system, each state would hold its own vote after the convention to ratify whatever proposed amendment emerged from a convention.

Some have asked me if the convention would be restricted to the topic of campaign finance, or if it could become a "runaway convention" that would address other issues. I do not believe there is any definitive legal answer to this question, but I do believe the 38-vote requirement gives us a definitive practical answer. The chance that 38 states would ultimately support other amendments (especially controversial ones) is essentially zero. Others have asked why SCR 6 does not propose a specific amendment to be debated at a convention. Rather than propose an amendment myself, I opted to introduce SCR 6 and enable convention delegates to examine concrete campaign finance data thoroughly before determining the best path forward for America.

I have also been asked why we would restrict individuals' right to exercise "free speech" by spending enormous amounts of money in elections. Even if you believe that money equals speech (which I do not), we already accept certain limitations on free speech in elections. Current laws prohibit you from wearing campaign stickers into polling places, and from standing too close to polling-place doors when campaigning. We acknowledge that such behavior would interfere with orderly, fair elections. Similarly, we should be willing to examine and acknowledge the negative impact of vast sums of money on orderly, fair elections.

Finally, some have suggested that an Article V convention would result in an entirely new Constitution, just as the Convention of 1787 replaced the Articles of Confederation with the U.S. Constitution. I believe there is no chance of this kind of dramatic outcome. In 1787, the discussions of the Constitutional Convention were deliberately secret. We can expect an Article V convention in 2015 or later to be live-streamed onto smart phones, tablets, computers, and televisions across the globe. It will be a very public display of democracy and the spirit of Article V.

It is reasonable for people to ask questions before supporting SCR 6. It would be disheartening, however, for them to oppose SCR 6 because of allegiance to "free speech" without regard to impact, or out of concern for highly improbable outcomes. The outcome of inaction is clear, and it is far worse than hypotheticals: if we fail to act, our elections will increasingly be dominated by the power of a wealthy few, not the democratic voice of the people. We would no longer be the America we now strive to protect. The American people deserve a genuinely representative democracy, and the Delaware General Assembly can help us take an important step in that direction by passing SCR 6.

State Sen. Bryan Townsend of Newark represents the 11th Senate District.