Texas House Bill HCR68

Texas 2019 - 86th Regular

Caption

Urging Congress to propose and submit to the states for ratification an amendment to the U.S. Constitution overturning the Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Impact

Should Congress act on this resolution, it could lead to significant changes in how campaign finance laws are structured at both state and national levels. The proposed amendment would challenge the existing framework that allows corporations to exert substantial financial influence over electoral outcomes, potentially restoring more equitable political dynamics where individual voters' voices are amplified rather than drowned out by corporate interests. Furthermore, it raises foundational questions about personhood in terms of electoral participation and the extent of corporate privileges granted by law.

Summary

HCR68 is a concurrent resolution urging Congress to propose and submit to the states for ratification an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that aims to overturn the Supreme Court's decision in the landmark case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. This decision has opened the door to unlimited corporate spending in elections, classifying political spending as a protected form of speech under the First Amendment. The resolution argues that the Constitution does not explicitly grant corporations the same rights as natural persons, particularly in the electoral context, and that the influence of corporate money undermines the political process and individual free speech rights.

Contention

There are notable points of contention surrounding HCR68. Advocates of the resolution argue that the overwhelming influence of corporate dollars in elections poses a threat to democratic processes and electoral integrity. Conversely, opposition may stem from those who believe that limiting corporate spending infringes upon free speech rights and could hinder the ability of organizations to advocate for their interests. The resolution thus ignites a broader debate about the balance between facilitating free expression and ensuring a fair electoral environment.