Citizens United v. FEC Constitutional Remedies: List of local, state and federal resolution efforts
Updated 1/31/2012

Federal Resolutions

112th Congress

  1. H.J.Res. 72 introduced on July 13, 2011 by Rep. Kurt Schrader. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States affirming the power of Congress and the States to regulate contribution of funds to candidates and the expenditure of funds intended to influence the outcome of elections.

  2. H.J.Res. 8 introduced on January 5, 2011 Rep. Marcy Kaptur. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to limitations on the amounts of contributions and expenditures that may be made in connection with campaigns for election to public office.

  3. S.J.Res. 29 introduced on November 1, 2011 by Senators Tom Udall (D-NM), Michael Bennet (D-CO), Tom Harkin (D-IA), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), Jeff Merkley (D-OR), and Mark Begich (D-AK). Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision on the Citizens United v. FEC.

  4. H.J.Res. 86 introduced on November 4, 2011 by Rep. Betty Sutton. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to reverse the Supreme Court’s decision on the Citizens United v. FEC.

  5. H.J.Res. 88 introduced on November 15, 2011 by Rep. Jim McGovern. Proposing an amendment that would overturn the Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United v. FEC and to make clear that corporations are not people.

  6. H.J.Res. 78 introduced on September 12, 2011 by Rep. Donna Edwards. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to clarify the authority of Congress and the States to regulate the expenditure of funds for political activity by corporations.

  7. H.J. Res. 90, introduced on November 18, 2011 by Rep. Ted Deutch. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to expressly exclude for-profit corporations from the rights given to natural persons by the Constitution of the United States, prohibit corporate spending in all elections, and affirm the authority of Congress and the States to regulate corporations and to regulate and set limits on all election contributions and expenditures.

  8. H.J. Res. 92, introduced on December 6, 2011 by Rep. Keith Ellison. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relating to the authority of Congress and the States to regulate the disbursement of funds for political activity by for-profit corporations and other for-profit business organizations.

  9. S.J. Res. 33, introduced on December 8th by Senator Bernie Sanders. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to expressly exclude for-profit corporations from the rights given to natural persons by the Constitution of the United States, prohibit corporate spending in all elections, and affirm the authority of Congress and the States to regulate corporations and to regulate and set limits on all election contributions and expenditures.

10. H.J. Res. 97, introduced on December 20th by Rep. John Yarmuth and Rep. Walter Jones. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States declaring that spending on elections does not qualify as protected speech under the First Amendment, giving Congress the authority to create a public financing system as the sole source of funding for federal elections, and designating a national holiday for the purpose of voting.

11. H.J. Res. 82 introduced on October 14, 2011 by Rep. Ted Deutch. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing regulation of any expenditure in connection with an election

12. H.J. Res. 100, introduced on January 18th, 2012 by Rep. Dennis Kucinich. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States declaring that elections should be publicly funded, and that Congress and the states have the right regulate independent expenditures.

13. S.J. Res. 35, introduced on January 24th, 2012, by Senator Max Baucus and Senator Jon Tester.  Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States authorizing Congress and states to regulate to raising and spending of corporate and labor funds in support of or in opposition to candidates running for federal and states offices.

111th Congress

  1. S.J.Res. 28 introduced on February 24, 2010 by Senators Chris Dodd (D-CT), Tom Udall (D-NM), Michael Bennet (D-C), Arlen Specter (D-PA). Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States affirming the power of Congress to regulate financing of federal elections and the power of states to regulate financing of state elections.

  2. H.J.Res. 74 introduced on February 2, 2010 by Rep. Donna Edwards. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States permitting Congress and the States to regulate the expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech.

  3. H.J.Res. 68 introduced on January 21, 2010 by Rep. Leonard Boswell. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States prohibiting corporations and labor organizations from using their operating funds to pay for political ads.

  4. H.J.Res. 84 introduced on May 13, 2010 by Rep. Kurt Schrader. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States giving Congress power to regulate campaign contributions for Federal elections.

  5. S.J.Res. 36 introduced on July 27, 2010 by Senator Max Baucus. Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to authorizing regulation of contributions to candidates for State public office and Federal office by corporations and labor organizations, and expenditures by corporate entities and labor organizations in support of, or opposition to such candidates.

  6. H.J.Res. 82 introduced on April 14, 2010 by Rep. Paul W. Hodes. Proposing the "Doris 'Granny D' Haddock Amendment of 2010" to the Constitution of the United States regarding the authority of Congress and the States to regulate the spending and activities of corporations with regard to political campaigns and campaigns for election for public office.

State and Local Resolutions

California

  1. Berkeley's Peace & Justice Commission in April 2010 passed a resolution calling for "amending the United States and California Constitutions to declare that corporations are not entitled to the protections or "rights" of human beings and to declare that the expenditure of corporate money is not a form of constitutionally protected speech."

  2. The CLC of Humboldt and Del Norte on April 12, 2011 adopted the Move to Amend Model Resolution.

  3. The Fort Bragg (CA) City Council on March 28, 2011 passed a resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to ban corporate personhood. All of the council members present voted for it; one member was absent.

  4. The Humboldt County Democratic Central Committee on February 10, 2010, passed the Resolution to Legalize Democracy and Abolish Corporate Personhood in response to the Citizens United v. FEC ruling. The resolution calls for an amendment to the US Constitution to abolish corporate personhood.

  5. The Associated Students of HSU on April 22, 2011 passed a resolution supporting the Move to Amend campaign and calling for a constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood. The resolution was proposed by a group of students working with Democracy Unlimited.

  6. On March 1, 2011, Richmond City Council unanimously passed a resolution that calls for a constitutional amendment to rectify corporate personhood and unlimited corporate spending in our elections.

  7. The South Robertson Neighborhood Council (SORONC) on July 21, 2011 passed a non-binding resolution to amend the Constitution to state clearly and unequivocally that human beings, not corporations, are entitled to constitutional rights and that money should not be equated with speech.

  8. The Wellstone Progressive Democrats of Sacramento passed a resolution that calls for a constitutional amendment that abolishes corporate personhood. They are going to send a letter with the endorsed resolution to the California State Democratic Central Committee asking the California Democratic Party to endorse the resolution.

  9. The Ojai Valley Democratic Club in August 15, 2011 endorsed a resolution supporting a Constitutional amendment ending corporate personhood.

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

10. Los Angeles City Council on December 6, 2011 endorsed a resolution to end personhood rights of corporations and allows Federal, State, and Local governments to regulate campaign finance.

Source:
Move to Amend, http://movetoamendla.org/

11. On Tuesday October 18, the Marina City Council passed a resolution calling for a constitutional amendment in response to the Citizens United vs Federal Election Commission case.

Source: Alliance For Democracy, http://afd-e-news.blogspot.com/2011/10/city-of-marina-california-resolves-to.html

12. In 2010, students at UC Santa Barbara passed a resolution against corporate personhood through their student government.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

13. On April 25th, 2000, the municipality of Point Arena and Aracata passed a resolution rejecting corporate personhood, which declared, “Interference in the democratic process by corporations frequently usurps the rights of citizens to govern.”

13. On January 23, 2010, Assemblyman Pedro Nava (D-35) introduced AJR 3, a bill that expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling, and calls upon Congress to pass a constitutional amendment to address the issue.

Source: Free Speech For People, http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/189

15. On December 20th, 2011, the city council of Oakland, California unanimously passed a resolution in support of a constitutional amendment to reverse the Citizens United decision.

16. On January 11th, 2012, the town council of Fairfax California approved a resolution in favor of abolishing corporate personhood with the intent of restoring the democratic process to the people.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

Colorado

  1. The Arapahoe County Democratic Central committee on April 5, 2011 approved a resolution in support of the Move to Amend constitutional amendment campaign.

  2. Boulder Democratic Party on April 13, 2011 passed a resolution supporting an anti-corporate personhood amendment.

  3. The Jamestown Board of Trustees on September 12, 2011 unanimously passed a resolution calling for an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to establish that only human beings, not corporations, are entitled to constitutional rights and that the First Amendment does not protect unlimited political spending as free speech.

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

4. On November 4, 2011, voters in Boulder City passed a ballot measure calling for an amendment to the US Constitution that would state that corporations are not people and reject the legal status of money as free speech.

Source:
Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/news/boulder-votes-constitutional-amendment-abolish-corporate-personhood

  1. In January of 2012, the Commissioners of Pueblo County, Colorado have unanimously passed a resolution in favor of overturning the Citizens United decision, and calling for the end of corporate personhood.

Source:
Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/news/pueblo-co-commissioners-call-constitutional-amendment-support-move-amend

Florida

  1. The Sarasota Alliance for Fair Elections (SAFE) has passed a resolution at the board's September 15th meeting. The resolution states that SAFE stands with the Move to Amend campaign and communities across the country to defend democracy from the corrupting effects of undue corporate power by amending the United States Constitution.

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

  1. In October of 2011, the South Miami City Commission passed a resolution calling for a constitutional amendment to end corporate personhood.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. In October of 2011, the Palm Beach County of Progressive Democrats passed a resolution calling for an amendment to end corporate personhood and reject the notion that money is speech.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. In October of 2011, the Coalition of Concerned Patriots of Bradenton passed a resolution standing with the Move to Amend campaign, and calling for constitutional remedies to counter corporate influence.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. In October of 2011, the Fruitland Park chapter of Pax Christi passed a resolution in support of a constitutional amendment and the Move to Amend campaign.

Hawaii

  1. HCR282 HD1 introduced on March 10, 2010 by Rep. Bob Herkes (D-5). Expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling and calls on the US Congress to propose an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to permit Congress and States to regulate expenditure of funds by corporations engaging in political speech.

  2. HR204 introduced on March 10, 2010, also by Rep. Bob Herkes (D-5). Expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling and calls on the US Congress to pass a constitutional amendment barring the use of "person" when defining "corporate entity."

  3. SCR225 introduced on March 10, 2010 by Senator Gary L. Hooser (D-7). Expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling and calls on the US Congress to pass a constitutional amendment barring the use of "person" when defining "corporate entity."

  4. SR116 introduced on March 10, 2010 by Senator Gary L. Hooser (D-7). Expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling and calls on the US Congress to pass a constitutional amendment barring the use of "person" when defining "corporate entity."

  5. HB36 introduced on January 20, 2011 by Rep. Karl Rhoads (D-28). Proposes a state constitutional amendment to provide that freedom of speech applies only to natural persons.

  6. HCR 51 – a joint measure – was introduced on February 11, 2011 by Rep. Roy Takumi (D-36). Proposes that the United States Congress pass a constitutional amendment that provides that corporations are not persons under the laws of the U.S. or any of its jurisdictional subdivisions.

  7. HR 44 – a House measure - introduced by Rep. Roy Takumi (D-36), was passed on April 14, 2011. Proposes that the United States Congress pass a constitutional amendment that provides that corporations are not persons under the laws of the U.S. or any of its jurisdictional subdivisions.

Idaho

  1. HJM012 introduced on February 24, 2010 in the House State Affairs Committee. Expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling and calls on the US Congress to take action through legislation or a constitutional amendment.

Maine

  1. Monroe residents at their annual town meeting on June 14, 2010, passed a Local Self-Governance Ordinance that stated that "no corporation doing business within the Town of Monroe shall be recognized as a "natural person" under the United States or Maine Constitutions or laws of the United States or Maine." For more information, see: http://www.celdf.org/monroe-rejects-corporate-personhood

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

  1. On January 18, 2012, the city council of Portland, Maine, passed a resolution in support of a constitutional amendment that would provide that corporations are not people.

Massachusetts

  1. On January 21, 2011, State Senator Jamie Eldridge introduced the Free Speech For People resolution calling for the United States Congress to pass and send the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections for the people.

Source:
Common Cause

  1. On April 24, 2010, the town of Leverett passed Move to Amend’s model resolution at a townhall meeting.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. In April of 2011, the town of Yarmouth passed a resolution in a Townhall demanding a constitutional amendment to dismantle corporate personhood.

  2. On May 3, 2011, the town of Brewster passed a resolution calling for the Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

  1. On May 9, 2011, the town of Chatham passed a resolution calling on the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

  1. On May 3, 2011, the town of Dennis passed a resolution calling on the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

  1. On May 2, 2011, the town of Great Barrington passed a resolution calling upon the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment that Congress and the states will regulate the use of funds for political speech by any corporate entity.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

  1. On May 8, 2011, the town of Orleans passed a resolution calling on the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

  1. On April 4, 2011, Provincetown passed resolution calling on the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people, and calling on the Massachusetts General Court to pass resolutions requesting those actions.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

10. On April 26, 2011, the town of Turo passed a resolution calling on the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

11. On April 26, 2011, the town of Wellfleet passed a resolution calling on the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

12. On May 12, 2011, Williamstown passed a resolution calling on the United States Congress to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

Michigan

  1. A resolution calling the recent Supreme Court decision to allow unlimited corporate funding of electioneering “another serious violation of the constitution,” some Michigan Libertarians have begun a movement to impeach Justice Kennedy.

Source:
Public Citizen, http://www.brianrwright.com/Coffee_Coaster/01_Columns/2010/Columns_Doc/100201_Will_White_News_Release.pdf

Minnesota

  1. Minnesota Coalition of Peacemakers on August 9, 2011 passed a resolution seeking to abolish corporate personhood by an amendment to the U.S. Constitution.

  2. In October of 2011, the Minnesota Retiree Council of the AFL-CIO passed a resolution to support Move to Amend.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. On December 13th, 2011, the city council of Duluth, Minnesota passed a resolution in opposition to the Citizens United decision and the legal definition of corporate personhood.

Montana

  1. The Missoula City Council on August 23, 2011 voted to place a referendum on the 2011 ballot that urges federal and state lawmakers to amend the U.S. Constitution to clearly state “that corporations are not human beings and do not have the same rights as citizens." On November 8, 2011, Missoula voters approved a local ballot referendum urging Congress to propose a constitutional amendment that clearly states that corporations are not people and do not have the same rights as citizens by a three to one margin.

Source:
Commonblog, http://www.commonblog.com/2011/11/09/missoula-voters-stand-up-to-citizens-united/

New Hampshire

  1. The Democratic Party of New Hampshire in May 2004, passed a resolution declaring that "Corporations shall not be considered "persons" protected by the Constitution of the United States or by the Constitutions of the states that so declare; and the rights of individual, natural persons shall be privileged over any and all rights that have been extended to artificial entities."

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

New Jersey

  1. AR 64 introduced on March 10, 2010 by Asm. Herb Conway Jr. (D-7) . An assembly resolution expressing strong opposition to the recent United States Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission concerning corporation campaign spending and calling upon the United States Congress to propose an amendment to the United States Constitution.

New Mexico

  1. Joint Memorial 36 was introduced on February 11, 2011, by Rep. Mimi Stewart (D-21), and failed by one vote on the House floor. Expresses strong opposition to the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and call upon the United States congress to propose and send to the states for ratification an amendment to the United States constitution to restore free speech and fair elections to the people of the United States.

New York

  1. The Essex County Democratic Committee in February 2011 voted to approve a constitutional amendment that would establish money is not speech and that people, not corporations, are people with constitutional rights.

  2. The Progressive Coalition of Northern New York in March 2011 approved the Move to Amend resolution.

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

  1. Albany Common Council in December 6, 2011 passed a resolution stating that “Corporations are not People.”

  2. On January 4th, 2012, the city council of New York City passed a resolution “supporting an amendment to the Constitution to provide that corporations are not entitled to the entirety of protections or ‘rights’ of natural persons.”

North Carolina

  1. The Alamance County Democrats on April 2011, passed a resolution at their democratic convention in calling for a Constitutional amendment to abolish corporate personhood

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

  1. On January 9th, 2012, the Chapel Hill Town Council passed the Move to Amend Resolution stating that corporations are not people and that money is not speech.

Oklahoma

  1. On May 17, 2003, the Oklahoma Democratic Party, at their state convention, approved a resolution opposing corporate personhood.

Oregon

  1. On June 23, 2011, the Democratic Party of Douglas County, Oregon voted to pass a resolution opposing Corporate Personhood and in support of the Move to Amend organization.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. On January 10, 2011, Representative Phil Barnhart introduced HJM 9, a resolution urging Congress to pass a constitutional amendment that would “restore the First Amendment and fair elections to the people.”

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

  1. On January, 12, 0212, the Portland City Council voted unanimously in favor of a resolution put for by Mayor Sam Adams, which declared that money is not speech and corporations are not people.

Source: http://movetoamend.org/news/portland-or-city-council-unanimously-supports-call-amendment

Pennsylvania

  1. HR 653 introduced on March 9, 2010 by Rep. Steve Santarsiero (D-31). Expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling and calls on the US Congress to call a constitutional convention.

Rhode Island

  1. H 8186 introduced on May 27, 2010 by Rep. David Segel (D-2). Applying to the Congress of the United States to call a constitutional convention.

Source:
Common Cause

South Dakota

  1. HCR 1018 introduced on March 2010, by Rep. Ed Iron Cloud (D-27) and Sen. Jim Bradford (R-27),failed on a 24-43 vote on the day after it was introduced. The resolution urged the Congress and the States to propose a constitutional amendment that would reverse Citizen’s United V. FEC decision.

Vermont

  1. JRS11 introduced January 21, 2011 by Senator Virginia Lyons (D-Chittendon). Joint resolution urging the United States Congress to propose an amendment to the United States Constitution, which provides that corporations are not persons under the laws of the united states or any of its jurisdictional subdivisions.

  2. On February 28, 2011, the town of Lincoln approved a resolution to end corporate personhood in their community.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

Virginia

  1. On December 11th, 2011, the Democratic Party of Virginia ratified a resolution against the Citizens United ruling, which provides “that corporations are not entitled to the same rights in our elections as people” and that “the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens Unite was incorrectly decided.”

Washington

  1. SJM 8027 introduced on February 4, 2010 by Senator Ken Jacobsen (D-46). Expresses disagreement with the Citizens United ruling and calls on the US Congress to pass a constitutional amendment.

  2. Washington State Democratic Party on April 30, 2011, passed a resolution entitled “Amending the U.S. Constitution to Reserve Constitutional Rights for People, not Corporations. The resolution calls on our state legislature to pass a joint resolution urging Congress “to pass and send to the states for ratification a constitutional amendment to establish that a corporation shall not be considered a person eligible for rights accorded to human beings” under the U.S. Constitution. The resolution goes on to say that the amendment should stipulate that “the use of money to influence elections or the acts of public officials shall not be considered a protected form of speech.”

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

  1. On February 16th, 2011, State Senator Adam Kline introduced SJM 8007, which requests a constitutional amendment declaring that corporations are not persons under U.S. law.

Source: http://freespeechforpeople.org/node/190

Wisconsin

  1. The Milwaukee County Democrats on March 28, 2011 passed a resolution that calls for amending the U.S. Constitution to make clear that corporations are not persons and that money is not speech.

  2. The Democratic Party of Wisconsin in June 2011 adopted a resolution in support of a constitutional amendment overturning the Citizens United V.FEC case

Source:
Move to Amend, http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UTF8&hl=en&msa=0&msid=203433765370726385061.000496ee20c83ccdb484d&ll=41.376809,-97.470703&spn=28.810276,79.013672&z=4

  1. In April of 2011, Dane County voters approved the following resolution by 78%: “Should the US Constitution be amended to establish that regulating political contributions and spending is not equivalent to limiting freedom of speech, by stating that only human beings, not corporations, are entitled to constitutional rights?”

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. In April of 2011, 84% of voters in Madison, WI approved a resolution containing the following: “Shall the City of Madison adopt the following reolution: RESOLVED, the City of Madison, Wisconsin, calls for reclaiming democracy from the corrupting effects of undue corporate influence by amending the United States Constitution to establish that:
    1. Only human beings, not corporations, are entitled to constitutional rights, and
    2. Money is not speech, and therefore regulating political contributions and spending is not equivalent to limiting political speech.”

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

  1. American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) 40 passed a resolution advocating for a constitutional amendment to oppose corporate personhood, and to declare that money is not speech.

Source: Move to Amend, http://movetoamend.org/resolutions-map

Share this page: Facebook Twitter Digg SU Digg Delicious