This is an archive of a past election.
See http://www.smartvoter.org/ca/cc/ for current information.
LWV League of Women Voters of California Education Fund If you appreciate our service to voters, please consider helping us with a donation.
Smart Voter
Contra Costa County, CA November 6, 2012 Election
Measure P
Amend U.S. Constitution Advisory Measure
City of Richmond
Advisory Vote Only

Pass: 20519 / 72.97% Yes votes ...... 7600 / 27.03% No votes

See Also: Index of all Measures
Results as of Dec 3 1:05pm, 100.0% of Precincts Reporting (53/53)
Information shown below: Impartial Analysis | Arguments |

Advisory Vote Only: Should Richmond's congressional representatives be instructed to propose, and Richmond's state legislators instructed to ratify, an amendment to the United States Constitution to provide that corporations are not entitled to the Constitutional rights of real people, and that there should be limits on all spending in political campaigns, including ballot measures and "independent" expenditures?

Impartial Analysis from City Attorney
Measure P is a non-binding, advisory measure concerning whether federal and states officials should take steps to amend the United States Constitution to state that (1) corporations do not have the same constitutional rights as natural persons, and (2) there should be limits on all campaign spending. Under state law the City Council may place an advisory measure on the ballot in order to receive general voter opinion on an issue. The results of this advisory vote will in no manner be controlling on the City or any other government agency or official.

For many decades, federal laws, as well as the laws of many states and local governments, prohibited corporations from making "independent expenditures" - spending money for the purpose of supporting or opposing a candidate for elected office, but without any direction or approval by the candidate about how the funds should be spent.

Beginning in the 1970s, the United States Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment prohibited limiting how much money could be spent to support or oppose candidates or ballot measures. In particular, the Supreme Court ruled that independent expenditures were generally a type of speech protected by the First Amendment.

In 1990, however, the Supreme Court ruled that laws banning corporations from making independent expenditures did not violate the First Amendment. That decision was based on the legal differences between corporations and natural persons, and the abilit y of corporations to use their wealth to distort the election process.

In the 2010 "Citizens United" case, the Supreme Court reversed its 1990 decision. The Supreme Court ruled that banning corporation from making independent expenditures does violate the First Amendment. This ruling means that federal, state and local governments may no longer ban corporations from making independent expenditures to support or oppose candidates.

Measure P asks whether Richmond's congressional representatives should be instructed to propose, and Richmond's state legislators instructed to ratify, an amendment to the United States Constitution stating that (1) corporations are not entitled to the constitutional rights of natural persons, and (2) there should be limits on all spending in political campaigns, including ballot measures and independent expenditures. Measure P provides an opportunity for the voters to offer their non-binding opinion regarding whether such a constitutional amendment should be adopted.

A copy of the full text of this ballot measure is available, free of charge, by telephoning the City Clerk's Office at (510) 620-6513 or at the City of Richmond's webpage: http://www.ci.richmond.ca.us.

Bruce Goodmiller City Attorney City of Richmond

  
This election is archived. Any links to sources outside of Smart Voter may no longer be active. No further links will be added to this page.
Links to sources outside of Smart Voter are provided for information only and do not imply endorsement.

Arguments For Measure P Arguments Against Measure P
Vote "Yes" if you're tired of unlimited corporate campaign contributions making politicians hurt our pocketbooks, our economy and our environment. Vote "Yes" if you believe that corporations aren't people and that money isn't speech. Vote "Yes" if you believe that the misguided Supreme Court's "Citizens United" decision that corporate campaign contributions cannot be limited must be overturned by a Constitutional Amendment.

Constitutional Amendments are a last resort, but unlimited corporate and special interest campaign contributions cause the 1% to get richer and the 99% to get poorer because politicians support wildly unpopular policies:

  • Bush era tax cuts for the wealthy

  • California has no oil severance tax

  • tax breaks to subsidize corporations sending our jobs out of our country.

It's like capital punishment: those without the capital get the punishment. Cities all over the country will be voting on similar advisory ballot measures. If enough voters vote yes, it'll send a powerful message that the Supreme Court's interpretation in "Citizens United" that corporations are people is broken, and needs to be fixed by a Constitutional Amendment. That "Free Speech" does not mean letting corporations use their unique legal advantages to make billions and then use that money on campaign contributions to drown out opposing viewpoints. That we reject the Supreme Court's misguided belief that some types of campaign contributions are worse than others- we should be able to set reasonable limits on all types.

This isn't about liberals versus conservatives, Democrats versus Republicans: polls show 80% bipartisan opposition to "Citizens United. "Nonpartisan Good Government groups like Common Cause and are leading the national Constitutional Amendment campaign against "Citizens United." It's about reclaiming our democracy, about protecting our middleclass, about reviving our country's founding ideal: "one person one vote", not "one dollar one vote."

Jim Rogers Councilmember/Former Vice-Chair, California Common Cause

Tom Butt Councilmember, City of Richmond

None filed.

Contra Costa Home Page || Statewide Links || About Smart Voter || Feedback
Created: December 17, 2012 13:44 PST
Smart Voter <http://www.smartvoter.org/>
Copyright © League of Women Voters of California Education Fund   http://cavotes.org
The League of Women Voters neither supports nor opposes candidates for public office or political parties.