Occupy Group Hopes Council Vote Will Spark Support

 

[Originally published Monday, Sept. 30, 2013] To the gleeful hoorahs of Occupy Democracy Pasadena and supporters, City Council adopted a resolution to support a Constitutional amendment revising the ruling of the 2010 Citizens United court case on Monday.

Pasadena joins the over 500 cities nationwide, 50 in California who have taken a supportive stance of reversing the impacts of the 2010 Citizens United court case that allows outside and anonymous investors to spend unlimited amount of money for political campaigns at the federal, state and local level.

“I’m just thrilled that the members who voted yes did so passionately and with a lot of conviction. They really believe in this,” Occupy Democracy Pasadena spokesperson Maddie Briggs said. “It’s a start for Pasadena and hopefully we will get to the amendment someday. This is another drop in the bucket, but it all adds up.”

The vote passed with six in favor and two abstentions by Councilmembers Terry Tornek and Gene Masuda who found the issue to be outside the line of jurisdiction of the City Council.

The Supreme Court ruling of Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission essentially gave free reign to outside and anonymous investors to spend unlimited amounts of money for political advertisements and campaigns at the federal, state, and local level.

“Elections are becoming more like auctions than elections. We want Pasadena to go on record that were against that and were urging congress to start getting on the ball to do something about this before democracy is gone,” Briggs had said before the vote.

In light of prior meetings with City Council members, Briggs had been hopeful about the resolution passing tonight. It turns out his optimism was well-founded.

“I think all of the members are very conscientious and very concerned about the impact of outside influence here in Pasadena. Not just for themselves, but for the integrity of our local government. I think they’re going to support it,” Briggs said.

The significant impacts can be seen even at the local level. According to Maddie, Fullerton recently experienced the impacts of not having local control of elections. In Fullerton a developer had been working for some time to get his projects approved, but the council members were not supporting it. When the city had a recall election, the developer invested a significant amount of money to place his individuals in office that would approve his development plan.

“You’re seeing people with outside money, outside influence, people that don’t have the best interest of the city at heart. And that could happen in the City of Pasadena,” Briggs said.

With the resolution Pasadena goes on record as being against outside money having such significant impact and wanting to retain local control of campaign spending for elections.

“Pasadena is jewel. If somebody wants to come and influence our elections here, say if they want a development to go through in Pasadena and they don’t like how we have a lot of historical preservation concerns, they could start running their own candidates that don’t care about historical preservations. Pasadena has a lot to lose with so many landmarks and such a high profile,” Briggs said.

The support at the local level is essential according to Briggs because only with the people pushing for the amendment in a grassroots effort will it eventually make it to congress for action. Currently 16 states have passed similar resolutions. When 32 states have passed resolutions then a constitutional convention can be called. Resolutions have also already been put forward in congress including a resolution written by Congressman Adam Schiff.

Now Pasadena has passed the resolution, the city joins the 500 other cities across the nation, 50 in California, asking Congress to seriously consider an amendment to the constitution that would effectively overturn the 2010 Supreme Court Citizens United decision.

“It passed under the radar a few years ago and no one really knew the implications, but they feel it. You know the super PAC and all the ads, that’s what this is about, about getting elections down to earth and being about issues and not about money,” Briggs said.