End Citizens United has always stood firmly to make sure campaign finance laws are upheld by the Courts in the United States. Recently, a complaint against Rick Scott was filed by End Citizens United with the Federal Election Commission. According to the End Citizens United political action committee, Rick Scott’s funding for his political campaigning has been using a “super PAC” to raise funds. So far, around $78 million has been raised for his campaigns. While it may be completely legal for a PAC to raise and spend as money as it wants as long as it’s not directly associated with any individual campaigns, it is suspected that Rick Scott is using the New Republican PAC to raise money for his campaigns. In fact, he held the position of Chairman for the New Republican PAC before he began his run for Senate.
Adam Bozzi believes that Rick Scott does not care about the laws concerning campaign financing and is only following his own political goals for the Senate seat. It is possible that he is using this PAC to avoid having to disclose the donors to his campaign and so he can raise large amounts quickly. While Rick Scott’s representatives are all claiming that these allegations are not true, End Citizens United has presented documents that strongly suggest otherwise. Despite Rick Scott saying that he had not been working with the New Republican PAC, there is evidence that he has been active in the committee in the last few months. As late as January, their website still listed him as the Chairman of the PAC.
In 2015, End Citizens United was created in response to the actions that the Citizens United PAC was taking in court that allowed them to not have to reveal the sources of their funding. Up until this point, PACs were always legally obligated to do so. The decision made by the Supreme Court that allowed them to keep this information confidential was met with resistance. It was shown that most residents of the United States believe that PAC limitations should, in fact, be placed and sources should have to be revealed. Unfortunately, Citizens United has supporters behind them with a large amount of money and political power. The Koch brothers and Betsy Devos are just some of these supporters, this gives the Republican party an unfair advantage according to the Democratic party and other supporters.
When a group called Citizens United sued the Federal Electoral Commission (FEC) for withholding the right to air its ad “Hillary: The Movie”, many saw the federal court’s decision expected. This was because Citizens United failed to reveal who funded the ad, or how much it would cost to air it, as it is required by federal laws that all political ads funding be identified. Citizens United were not satisfied with the decision and took the cases to the US Supreme Court which overturned FEC’s. This happened two years later when President Obama had already been in office and the campaigns over.
Most people did not expect such a decision, and it sent a widely drawn debate with opposition against the court rising relentlessly with Public Action Committees (PACs) being formed. End Citizens United was established in 2015 as part of the political effects to help look for a legal way to overturn the ruling.
The long-hour film was a personal attack on Democratic presidential primaries candidate Hillary Clinton. When the ruling was made, it meant that the right to freedom of speech was overlooked unlike it is stated in the First Amendments of the U.S. Constitutions to corporations. Here they were allowed to influence the outcome of elections. It is important to note that most US corporations are multinationals, and have substantial foreign interests which can translate to considerable funding in an already plump US election system.
The ruling allowed for anonymous and unlimited campaign funding by corporations that would drastically increase television and radio ads during electioneering period. In addition to the tiresome ads voters have to face, donors were given no responsibility for their funding. Additionally, the Republican Party was at an advantage due to its high link and connections with wealthy individuals who own some of the biggest corporations in the US.
End Citizens United means what its name spells. Using grassroots funding to counterbalance Citizens United’s corporate funds, this PAC uses the fund on Democratic candidates who support their efforts to counter the complications of the Supreme Court’s ruling. End Citizens United seeks to front the campaign finance reform in the national political arena. This includes Constitution amendments to allow the right of speech to be only on individual citizens and not corporations.
They support only candidates who show firm pledges towards campaign finance reforms as part of their strategy to reach their goal. End Citizens United grassroots funding is aimed at creating a broad coalition of Americans with the specific goal of campaign reforms building a political activist feedback loop.
End Citizen United is a political committee that has a mission of terminating the use of large sums of money in politics and solve the manipulated political structure by holding many reform campaigns in the finance, developing and authorizing national ballot measures and raising the problem in the national dialogue. End Citizen United has also collaborated with other organizations to overturn Citizen United and terminate the unlimited and secret usage of money in the United States politics. To accomplish that mission, End Citizen United will appoint candidates that support reforms, will raise the matter of using foreign money in politics to a critical national issue and involving the ordinary members to show how money influences the politics. The political committee also has a role of enlightening the public about the matter.
In the recent past, End Citizen United learned that a Russian company that is related to Kremlin bought ads that had a purpose of manipulating the previous presidential election. As a result of this issue, End Citizen United recognized that the United States elections laws were not functioning well since it is an offense to spend foreign money on political campaigns.
Robert Mueller who is a special counsel, has been mandated by the committee to investigate whether Donald Trump involved the Russians in manipulating the 2016 elections. The committee believes that Robert will get deep into the matter and come up with proper findings. The only thing that is worrying the board is whether Washington will be ready to end foreign influence in the United States election in future.
It is not only the foreign governments that take advantage of the feeble election laws but also prominent organizations or wealthy individuals can influence the US politics. For instance, a Chinese company donated 1.3 million dollars to Super PAC. Similarly, a wealthy Mexican businessman funded the Super PAC with vast sums of money. Even though the committee is conscious of the foreign entities that were involved in the previous campaigns, it speculates that more unrecognized external organizations and individuals could have participated in altering the outcomes of the election. The committee also thinks that there is a possibility that foreign governments could have spent ten million dollars to manipulate the polls.
End Citizen United believes that all those foreign donations are just beginning with many subsequent contributions in the proceeding elections. They also think that the government has the necessary solutions to the issue but lacks the will to solve it. Learn more:https://www.crunchbase.com/organization/end-citizens-united
The country has learned a lot of lessons from the election that has just been concluded. One of the most important lessons that everyone ought to take away from the process is the fact that there was too much interference from outside forces, and this could have had a direct influence on the outcome. People have been suspecting that the Russians interfered with the electoral process, and new evidence has emerged linking other groups to the process. The End Citizens United is a PAC which feels that it is time to make changes to the laws that govern the electoral process.
The group was initially put in place to help organize fundraising efforts for various Democratic Party Candidates. They helped raise funds, which put several of their preferred contestants in office. The other issue that has been disturbing them, however, is the illegal entrance of big corporates in the electoral process and the fact that it is possible for these groups to offer any amount of money to the candidates running. They feel that this creates leaders who are easy to manipulate, which is not good for the proper governance of a country. They want to have the Johnson Amendment protected from changes that would undermine the Democracy that we have been fighting for in the past few centuries.
The Johnson’s amendment was put in place to prohibit organizations such as churches from taking part in the electoral process. The government is looking for loopholes that they can use to weaken the amendment and create a situation where the churches can be used by politicians to further their agenda and acquire financial assistance. The primary task of the End Citizens United here is to make sure that the bill, which the president is already set to sign into law, does not become law. The leader of the End Citizens United says that any amendment which brings churches on board as interested partners in the electoral process will always be counter-productive because they might turn churches into tools which can be used by anyone in the process of trying to get into office.
The CEO of the Group, Tiffany Muller says that there is a reason behind the introduction of the Johnson Amendment, which was done in 1954. She adds that it is upon all the citizens of the country to think about the chaos that the national political scene will become when churches and schools become partisan in the electoral process. The law states that churches and schools can lose their tax exemption if they are found to be taking part in such political activities. The End Citizens United is here to ensure that the rule of law is respected.
When Texas Senator Lyndon B. Johnson introduced his amendment to the United States Constitution in 1954, it did not attract much attention in the media or raise eyebrows in the political circles. It seemed to all as a reasonable amendment that reinforced a basic American principle which envisioned a country where the church and the state operated independent of each other. In fact, the amendment was made into law that very year and was signed into law by a Republican president Dwight Eisenhower. However, as the years have progressed and the effects of the amendment have come to be felt in the political arena, it has become a bone of contention.
The Republican Party, ironically, has been actively attempting to repeal or weaken the Johnson Amendment over the years. Many Republican politicians have spoken against it on different occasions, key among them President Donald Trump. In fact, a repeal of this amendment was one of his key campaign promises during his presidential campaign in 2016. And now that he is president, Republican Party legislators have been making attempts to either weaken the amendment or repeal it altogether.
There is a reason why politicians would wish to do away with the Johnson Amendment. Mainly its because it prohibits tax-exempt non-profit organizations such as charities, universities, and churches from campaigning for or against a political candidate. These organizations and institutions, referred to as 501(c)(3), would lose their tax-exempt status if they were to violate this amendment. Politicians are more concerned with the inability of the church to participate in political discourse than any other organization. There are two main reasons for this. Firstly, the church is a very influential institution which bears the ability to steer its congregants’ political persuasion, making it the most powerful political tool which cannot be used. Watch youtube to know more.
The second one is the money. Americans contribute billions of dollars to the church each year, with the belief that they would be used for good courses both in the country and around the world. Repealing the Johnson Amendment would allow the churches to spend such money for political campaigns. However, the main concern is that doing this would open a loophole for the wealthy to channel their campaign contributions through the churches. This would create an avenue for dark money to find its way into political campaigns.
That is why End Citizens America has started a campaign to save the Johnson Amendment. End Citizens America is a PAC which was established in 2010 with the aim of preventing dark money from entering into political campaigns. This was after the Supreme Court of United States, adjudicating the Citizens United v. FEC case, determined that corporate bodies bore the same rights as individuals, a decision which allowed such bodies to contribute money to political campaigns anonymously. This made it difficult to prevent dark money from entering the American political process.
End Citizens America views the recent attempts at weakening or repealing the Johnson Amendment as another affront to American democracy which would create another avenue for dark money to enter in the political campaigns. Know more: https://www.fec.gov/data/committee/C00573261/