H.Con.Res.13 - Expressing the sense of Congress that the Supreme Court misinterpreted the First Amendment to the Constitution in the case of Buckley v. Valeo.

Loading Bill Text
Rollover any line of text to comment and/or link to it.

A project of the Participatory Politics Foundation and the Sunlight Foundation
U.S. Congress - Text of H.Con.Res.13 as Introduced in House Expressing the sense of Congress that the Supreme Court misinterpreted the First Amendm...A non-profit, non-partisan public resource
Everyone can be an insider. Learn how.Use the options to the right to narrow down your search results.
Sessions:
112th CongressSearch in:
The easiest way to email your members of Congress
Donate Now
Rollover any line of text to comment and/or link to it.
HCON 13 IHCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
111th CONGRESSCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
1st SessionCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
H. CON. RES. 13CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
Expressing the sense of Congress that the Supreme Court misinterpreted the First Amendment to the Constitution in the case of Buckley v. Valeo.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVESCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
January 8, 2009CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
Ms. KAPTUR (for herself and Mr. HIGGINS) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the JudiciaryCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
CONCURRENT RESOLUTIONCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
Expressing the sense of Congress that the Supreme Court misinterpreted the First Amendment to the Constitution in the case of Buckley v. Valeo.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of Congress that the Supreme Court misinterpreted the First Amendment to the Constitution in its decision in the 1976 case of Buckley v. Valeo because--CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) the decision failed to recognize that the unlimited spending of large amounts of money on elections has a corrosive effect on the electoral process not simply because of direct transactions between those who give large amounts of money and candidates and elected officials but because the presence of unlimited amounts of money corrupts the process on a more fundamental level; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) the decision failed to recognize other legitimate state interests which justify limiting money in campaigns, including the need to preserve the integrity of our republican form of government, restore public confidence in government, and ensure all citizens a more equal opportunity to participate in the political process.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
OpenCongress is a free and open-source project of the Participatory Politics Foundation, a 501(c)3 non-profit organization with a mission to increase civic engagement. The non-profit Sunlight Foundation is the Founding and Primary Supporter of OpenCongress.