A Follow-up To The Citizens United Follow-up

As a follow-up to yesterday's post on the fallout from Citizens United v. FEC, here's a more detailed list of the types of responses being floated by lawmakers:

• Constitutional Amendment (Senate): a measure proposed this week would expressly authorize Congress to regulate "the raising and spending" of federal election money, and set set limits on federal campaign contributions and expenditures.  States could do the same for state elections.  
• Constitutional Amendment (House): authorizing Congress to regulate "the expenditure of funds for political speech by any corporation, limited liability company, or other corporate entity."
• Constitutional Amendment (House): introduced the day Citizens United was decided, this measure would bar corporations and labor organizations from using general treasury funds to pay for a federal campaign ad, regardless of whether the ad expressly advocates for the election or defeat of a particular candidate. 
• The Fair Elections Now Act: this bi-partisan measure seeks to eliminate the influence of corporate money by allocating federal funds to candidates who raise a certain amount through small-dollar contributions. 
• Save Our Democracy From Foreign Influence Act: a bill that would apply the ban on contributions and expenditures by foreign nationals to domestic corporations whose shareholders include any foreign principles.
• Separate Taxpayer Dollars From the Election Act of 2010: to prevent corporations from using TARP money on campaign expenditures or electioneering communications.
• Stand By Your Ad Act of 2010: requiring that certain radio and television campaign ads disclose the top donors behind them.

-Kathleen Bergin