by Frank Kirkwood<\/p>\n
October 2015<\/p>\n
(See\u00a0Our Political Revolution<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0for context and discussion of this Website Review.)<\/em><\/p>\n Legislation to set up\u00a0publicly funded elections<\/strong>\u00a0has been introduced in Congress many times over the last 20 years.\u00a0 In the current Congress, the bill in the House of Representatives for publicly funded elections is H.R. 20, the\u00a0Government By the People Act<\/b>.\u00a0 In the Senate, it is S. 1538, the\u00a0Fair Elections Now Act<\/b>.\u00a0 H.R. 20, is sponsored by Rep. Sarbanes.\u00a0 S. 1538 is sponsored by Sen. Durbin. \u00a0There are 174 sponsors or co-sponsors in the Congress for these publicly funded elections bills.<\/p>\n On the\u00a0Citizens United<\/i><\/strong>\u00a0front, there are 177\u00a0sponsors or\u00a0co-sponsors in Congress of resolutions to amend the constitution to fix the\u00a0Citizens United<\/em>\u00a0decision. \u00a0\u00a0S.J.Res.5<\/b>, sponsored by Sen. Udall (NM), is the Senate resolution and\u00a0H.J.Res.22<\/b>, sponsored by Rep Deutch, is the resolution in the House.<\/p>\n We should expect real leaders of these politically revolutionary bills to use their websites, their face to the public, to say to their constituents, \u201cLike you, I recognize that our democracy is in trouble.\u00a0 There are solutions to these problems and I am working hard to pass them.\u00a0 Look at what I have done already.\u00a0 I have co-sponsored the bills to fix\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0and to create publicly funded elections.<\/i>\u201d<\/p>\n Real leaders would take the opportunity to use their websites to acknowledge the public\u2019s frustration and to educate their constituents about the solutions that are available to the money-in-politics problem and to let the citizens know that their representative is on the forefront of this fight.<\/p>\n In August of 2015, I reviewed the websites of the sponsors and co-sponsors of the two bills to create publicly funded elections.\u00a0 I also looked at the websites of the sponsors and co-sponsors of the two resolutions to amend the constitution to fix the\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0decision.\u00a0 I looked at both the official congressional website and the campaign website of each of these elected officials.<\/p>\n For the first group, I looked for statements on their websites about the public funding of elections bills or, more generally, about their support of publicly funded elections.\u00a0 In the second group, I looked for statements about the specific resolutions or for a mention of a plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>.<\/p>\n Here is what I found:<\/p>\n Do members of Congress\u00a0who say they support\u00a0publicly funded elections<\/b>\u00a0demonstrate their support on their websites?<\/p>\n The official congressional websites and the campaign websites of the sponsors\/co-sponsors of the\u00a0Fair Elections Now Act<\/b>\u00a0(in the Senate) and the\u00a0Government for the People Act<\/b>\u00a0(in the House) were reviewed.<\/p>\n RESULTS FOR DEMOCRATIC SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS:<\/b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n 84%\u00a0<\/b>(145 of 172)\u00a0of Democratic<\/b>\u00a0sponsors\/co-sponsors<\/strong>\u00a0<\/b>of bills to create publicly funded elections\u00a0do not<\/b>\u00a0mention their support for these bills or their support for publicly funded elections on\u00a0either<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 16%<\/b>\u00a0(28 of 172)\u00a0of Democratic\u00a0<\/b>sponsors\/co-sponsors\u00a0<\/strong>mention their support for these bills or their support for publicly funded elections generally on\u00a0either or both of<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 3%<\/strong>\u00a0(6 of 172) of Democratic\u00a0sponsors\/co-sponsors\u00a0mention<\/strong>\u00a0their support for these bills or their support for publicly funded elections generally\u00a0on both<\/strong>\u00a0their official and campaign websites.<\/p>\n Total Democrats sponsoring\/co-sponsoring publicly funded elections bills in Congress = 172.<\/i>\u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n RESULTS FOR REPUBLICAN\u00a0SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS:<\/b><\/p>\n One Republican, Rep. Walter Jones of NC, is a co-sponsor of H.R. 20.\u00a0 He mentions the bill or publicly funded elections on his official website but mentions neither on his campaign website.<\/p>\n RESULTS FOR INDEPENDENT SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS:<\/b><\/p>\n One Independent, Sen. Bernie Sanders of VT, is a co-sponsor of S. 1538.\u00a0 He mentions the bill or publicly funded elections on both his official and campaign websites.<\/p>\n RESULTS FOR ALL SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS (ALL PARTIES):<\/b><\/p>\n <\/b>83%\u00a0<\/b>(145 of 174)\u00a0of all sponsors\/co-sponsors<\/b>\u00a0of bills to create publicly funded elections\u00a0do not<\/b>\u00a0mention their support for these bills or their support for publicly funded elections on\u00a0either<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 17%<\/b>\u00a0(30 of 174)\u00a0of all sponsors\/co-sponsors<\/b>\u00a0mention their support for these bills or their support for publicly funded elections generally on\u00a0either or both of<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 4%<\/b>\u00a0(7 of 174) of all\u00a0sponsors\/co-sponsors<\/b>\u00a0mention<\/b>\u00a0their support for these bills or their support for publicly funded elections generally\u00a0on both<\/b>\u00a0their official and campaign websites.<\/p>\n Number of sponsors\/co-sponsors of publicly funded elections bills in Congress = 174.<\/em> Look\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0for details of co-sponsor websites review.<\/i><\/p>\n Do members of\u00a0Congress who say they support fixing\u00a0Citizens United<\/i><\/b>\u00a0demonstrate their support on their websites?<\/p>\n The official congressional websites and the campaign websites of the sponsors\/co-sponsors of\u00a0S.J.RES.5<\/i>\u00a0(in the Senate) and the\u00a0H.J.Res.22<\/i>\u00a0(in the House) were reviewed.<\/p>\n RESULTS FOR DEMOCRATIC SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS:<\/b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n 76%\u00a0<\/b>(133 of 174)\u00a0of Democratic sponsors\/co-sponsors\u00a0<\/b>of Congressional resolutions to overturn the\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0decision by amending the Constitution\u00a0do not<\/b>\u00a0mention their support for the resolutions or any plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0on\u00a0either<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 24%<\/b>\u00a0(41 of 174)\u00a0of Democratic sponsors\/co-sponsors<\/b>\u00a0of these resolutions mention the resolutions or a plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United\u00a0<\/i>on\u00a0either or both of<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 6%<\/strong>\u00a0(11 of 174) of Democratic co-sponsors\u00a0mention<\/strong>\u00a0their support for these resolutions or for a plan to fix Citizens United\u00a0on both<\/strong>\u00a0their official and campaign websites.<\/p>\n RESULTS FOR REPUBLICAN\u00a0SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS:<\/b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n One Republican, Rep. Walter Jones of NC, is a co-sponsor of H.J. Res 22.\u00a0 He does not mention his support for this resolution or a plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0on\u00a0either\u00a0his official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n RESULTS FOR INDEPENDENT\u00a0SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS:<\/b>\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n Sen. Bernie Sanders of VT is a co-sponsor of S.J. Res. 5.\u00a0 He mentions his support for this resolution or for a plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0on\u00a0both\u00a0his official and campaign websites.<\/p>\n Sen. Angus King of ME is a co-sponsor of S.J. Res. 5.\u00a0 He does not mention his support for this resolution or for a plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United on either his official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n RESULTS FOR ALL SPONSORS\/CO-SPONSORS (ALL PARTIES):<\/b><\/p>\n 76%\u00a0<\/b>(135 of 177)\u00a0of all sponsor\/co-sponsors\u00a0<\/b>of Congressional resolutions to overturn the\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0decision by amending the Constitution\u00a0do not<\/b>\u00a0mention their support for these resolutions or for a plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United<\/i>\u00a0on\u00a0either or both of<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 24%<\/b>\u00a0(42 of 177)\u00a0of all sponsor\/co-sponsors<\/b>\u00a0of these resolutions mention these resolutions or a plan to fix\u00a0Citizens United\u00a0<\/i>on\u00a0either or both of<\/b>\u00a0their official or campaign websites.<\/p>\n Only 7%<\/b>\u00a0(12 of 177)\u00a0of all sponsor\/co-sponsors<\/b>\u00a0do mention<\/b>\u00a0their support for these resolutions or a plan to fix Citizens United\u00a0on both<\/b>\u00a0their official and campaign websites.<\/p>\n Look\u00a0<\/i>here<\/i><\/a>\u00a0for details of co-sponsor website review.<\/i><\/p>\n <\/i>(See\u00a0Our Political Revolution<\/strong><\/a>\u00a0for context and discussion of this Website Review.)<\/p>\n Senate – S. 1538, Publicly Funded Elections – August 2015<\/i><\/b><\/span><\/p>\n Review of the websites of the Democratic Co-Sponsors of S. 1538, the Fair Elections Now Act,\u00a0looking for statements about S. 1538 or statements in support of publicly funded elections.<\/p>\n Total number of Democratic Senators sponsoring (1) or Co-Sponsoring (20) the Act = 21<\/p>\n (See Tally sheet<\/a>.)<\/p>\n Methodology:<\/b><\/p>\n I looked at the official and campaign websites of all Democratic Senate Co-Sponsors of S. 1538 to see if their websites include a statement about S. 1538 and\/or statements in support of publicly funded elections.<\/p>\n I visited each Democratic Senator\u2019s official website and campaign website in August 2015.\u00a0 Typically, I looked under the \u201cIssues\u201d tab or the \u201cPriorities\u201d tab for a sub-heading entitled, \u201cCleaning up Washington\u201d, \u201cEthics and Responsibility\u201d, \u201cMaking Government Work\u201d, \u201cCampaign Finance Reform\u201d, \u201cGood Governance\u201d, \u201cGetting Big Money Out of Politics\u201d or similar phrases.\u00a0 If there were no titles of that nature, I would look at the \u201cAbout\u201d tab or anywhere that looked probable.\u00a0 When I could find a relevant section, I would look for language mentioning support of publicly funded elections and\/or specifically a mention of S. 1538.*<\/p>\n Results for Democratic members of the Senate:<\/b><\/p>\n “Does the official Senate website mention support for S. 1538 or support of publicly funded elections for Congress?” “Does the campaign website mention support for S. 1538 or support of publicly funded elections?\u201d Number of Democratic Senators who mention publicly funded elections or the Fair Elections Now Act on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Number of Democratic Senators who do not<\/b> mention publicly funded elections or the Fair Elections Now Act on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Number of Democratic Senators who do<\/b> mention publicly funded elections or H.R. 20 on both<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Review of the websites of the Co-Sponsors of H.R. 20, the Government for the People Act, looking for statements about H.R. 20 or statements in support of publicly funded elections.<\/p>\n Methodology:<\/b><\/p>\n I looked at the official and campaign websites of all House Co-Sponsors of H.R. 20 (Government for the People Act) to see if their websites include a statement about H.R. 20 or in support of publicly funded elections.<\/p>\n I visited each Member\u2019s official congressional website and their campaign website in August 2015.\u00a0 Typically, I looked under the \u201cIssues\u201d tab or the \u201cPriorities\u201d tab for a sub-heading entitled, \u201cCleaning up Washington\u201d, \u201cEthics and Responsibility\u201d, \u201cMaking Government Work\u201d, \u201cCampaign Finance Reform\u201d, \u201cGood Governance\u201d, \u201cGetting Big Money Out of Politics\u201d or similar phrases.\u00a0 If there were no titles of that nature, I would look at the \u201cAbout\u201d tab or anywhere that looked probable.\u00a0 When I could find a relevant section, I would look for language in support of publicly funded elections and\/or specifically a mention of H.R. 20.*<\/p>\n Total number of member of Democratic members of the House of Representatives who are sponsors (1) or co-sponsoring (150) the Act = 151.<\/p>\n (See tally sheet<\/a>.)<\/p>\n Results for Democratic Members of the House:<\/b><\/p>\n “Does the Representative\u2019s official Congressional website mention support for H.R. 20 or support of publicly funded elections for Congress?” “Does the Representative\u2019s campaign website mention support for H.R. 20 or support of publicly funded elections?\u201d Number of Representatives who mention publicly funded elections or H.R. 20 on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Number of Representatives who do not<\/b> mention publicly funded elections or H.R. 20 on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Number of Representatives who do<\/b> mention publicly funded elections or H.R. 20 on both<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Review of the websites of the Democratic Co-Sponsors of S.J.Res.5 – (A joint resolution proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections.) for the purpose of locating statements about S.J.RES.5 or about the Citizens United <\/i>decision and the need to fix it.<\/p>\n Methodology:<\/b><\/p>\n I looked at the official and campaign websites of all Democratic Senate Co-Sponsors of S. 1538 to see if their websites include a statement about S.J.RES.5 or the Citizens United<\/i> decision and a statement about the need to fix the decision.<\/p>\n I visited each Senator\u2019s official website and their campaign website in August 2015.\u00a0 Typically, I looked under the \u201cIssues\u201d tab or the \u201cPriorities\u201d tab for a sub-heading entitled, \u201cCleaning up Washington\u201d, \u201cEthics and Responsibility\u201d, \u201cMaking Government Work\u201d, \u201cCampaign Finance Reform\u201d, \u201cGood Governance\u201d, \u201cGetting Big Money Out of Politics\u201d or similar phrases.\u00a0 If there were no titles of that nature, I would look at the \u201cAbout\u201d tab or anywhere that looked probable.\u00a0 When I could find a relevant section, I would look for statements about S.J.RES.5 or about the Citizens United <\/i>decision and the need to fix it..*<\/p>\n A Senator\u2019s support of legislation (such as, the Disclose Act) which would mitigate the harm but would not fix the central problems created by the decision was not, by itself, scored as a “fix” to Citizens United<\/i>.<\/p>\n Total number of Democratic Senators sponsoring (1) or Co-Sponsoring (37) S.J.RES.5 = 38<\/p>\n (See Tally sheet<\/a>.)<\/p>\n Results for Democratic Senators:<\/b><\/p>\n “Does the Senator\u2019s official website mention S.J.RES.5\u00a0 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i>?\u201d \u201cDoes the Senator\u2019s campaign website mention S.J.RES.5 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i>?” Percent of Democratic Senators who mention S.J.RES.5 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i> on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Number of Democratic Senators who do not <\/b>mention S.J.RES.5 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i> on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Number of Democratic Senators who do <\/b>mention S.J.RES.5 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i> on both<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Total number of Democratic members of the House of Representatives who are sponsors (1) or co-sponsors (135) H.J. Res. 22 = 136.<\/p>\n (See tally sheet<\/a>.)<\/p>\n Review of the websites of the co-sponsors of H.J.Res.22 (Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to contributions and expenditures intended to affect elections.) for the purpose of locating statements about H.J. Res 22 or about the Citizens United <\/i>decision and the need to fix it.<\/p>\n Methodology:<\/b><\/p>\n I looked at the official and campaign websites of all House Co-Sponsors of H.J.Res.22 to see if their websites include a statement about H.J.Res.22 or about the Citizens United<\/i> decision and a statement about the need to fix that decision.\u00a0 A member\u2019s support of legislation (such as, the Disclose Act) which would mitigate the harm but not fix the central problems created by the decision was not, by itself, scored as a “fix” to Citizens United<\/i>.*<\/p>\n I visited each Representative\u2019s official congressional website and their campaign website in August 2015.\u00a0 Typically, I looked under the \u201cIssues\u201d tab or the \u201cPriorities\u201d tab for a sub-heading entitled, \u201cCleaning up Washington\u201d, \u201cEthics and Responsibility\u201d, \u201cMaking Government Work\u201d, \u201cCampaign Finance Reform\u201d, \u201cGood Governance\u201d, \u201cGetting Big Money Out of Politics\u201d or similar phrases.\u00a0 If there were no titles of that nature, I would look at the \u201cAbout\u201d tab or anywhere that looked probable.\u00a0 When I could find a relevant section, I would look for language about H.J. Res 22 or about the Citizens United <\/i>decision and the need to fix it.<\/p>\n Results for Democratic Members of the House:<\/b><\/p>\n “Does the Representative\u2019s official House website mention H.J. Res. 22 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i>?” “Does the Representative\u2019s campaign website mention H.J. Res. 22 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i>?\u201d Percentage of Democratic Representatives who mention H.J. Res. 22 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i> on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Percentage of Democratic Representatives who do not<\/b> mention H.J. Res. 22 or a plan to fix Citizens United <\/i>on either<\/b> their official or their campaign website: Percentage of Democratic Representatives who do <\/b>mention H.J. Res. 22 or a plan to fix Citizens United<\/i> on both<\/b> their official and their campaign website: *I did not search through the tabs on the websites that linked to lists of \u201cLegislation I have Co-Sponsored\u201d.\u00a0 Typically these tabs were linked to the Library of Congress site listing hundreds of bills co-sponsored by the member.\u00a0 Similarly, archived lists of press releases were not checked. \u00a0 An \u201cadvanced\u201d search of a lawmaker\u2019s domain may well return press releases or official statements that are buried somewhere on the lawmaker\u2019s website.\u00a0 What I was looking for here was evidence that these lawmakers are actively and visibly supporting fundamental political power reform by being leaders in educating the public about the money-in-politics problem and the solutions.\u00a0<\/i><\/p>\n To report errors\/omissions\/newly posted statements to:\u00a0 TrustworthyGovernment@gmail.com<\/a><\/p>\nPublicly Funded Elections<\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n
\nIn the Senate:\u00a0 S. 1538, the Fair Elections Now Act\u00a0 (22 sponsor\/co-sponsors).<\/em>
\nIn the House:\u00a0 H.R. 20, the Government for the People Act\u00a0 (152 sponsor\/co-sponsors).\u00a0<\/em><\/p>\nCitizens United<\/i><\/b><\/span><\/h2>\n
<\/b><\/b>
\nDETAILS OF REVIEWS<\/b><\/h3>\n
\nYes = 23%, No = 77%\u00a0 \u00a0 (Yes = 5, No = 17)<\/p>\n
\nYes = 9%, No = 91% \u00a0 (Yes = 2, No = 20)<\/p>\n
\n23% (5 of 22)<\/p>\n
\n77% (17 of 22)<\/p>\n
\n3%<\/b>\u00a0 (1 of 22)<\/p>\nHouse – H.R. 20, Publicly Funded Elections – August 2015<\/i><\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n
\nYes = 11%, No = 89%<\/b> \u00a0 (Yes = 17, No = 134)<\/p>\n
\nYes = 7%, No = 93% <\/b>\u00a0 (Yes = 11, No = 140)<\/p>\n
\n15%<\/b>\u00a0 (23 of 151)<\/p>\n
\n85%<\/b>\u00a0 (128 of 151)<\/p>\n
\n3%<\/b>\u00a0 (5 of 151)<\/p>\nSenate – S.J.RES.5 Co-Sponsors (Citizens United) – August 2015<\/i><\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n
\nYes = 13%, No = 87% <\/b>(Yes = 5, No = 33)<\/p>\n
\nYes = 13%, No = 87% <\/b>(Yes = 5, No = 33)<\/p>\n
\n18%<\/b> (7 of 38)<\/p>\n
\n82%\u00a0<\/b> (31 of 38)<\/p>\n
\n8%\u00a0<\/b> (3 of 38)<\/p>\nHouse – H.J. Res. 22 Democratic Co-Sponsors (Citizens United) – August 2015<\/i><\/b><\/span><\/h3>\n
\nYes = 20%, No = 80%\u00a0 <\/b>(Yes = 27 , No = 109)<\/b><\/p>\n
\nYes = 11%, No = 89%\u00a0 <\/b>(Yes = 15, No = 121)<\/p>\n
\n25% <\/b>(34 of 136)<\/p>\n
\n75% <\/b>(102 of 136)<\/p>\n
\n6% <\/b>(8 of 136)<\/p>\n