Wolf PAC

Formation and background

On January 21, 2010, the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United v. FEC that it is unconstitutional to restrict independent expenditures by corporations, unions, and other associations. This ruling was followed in March by the D.C. District Court of Appeals Speechnow.org v. FEC case, in which the court explicitly allowed the creation of Super PACs, which are allowed to spend unlimited money to influence elections, as long as they do not coordinate with any candidates.

These court cases are widely viewed as having increased the influence of moneyed interests in the American political system, and convinced Cenk Uygur, the host of the online news show The Young Turks, that action was necessary. Although the paperwork to form Wolf PAC was filed with the FEC as early as June 2010, Uygur announced the creation of Wolf PAC on October 19, 2011 during the Occupy Wall Street occupation of Zucotti Park in New York City.

Progress in particular states

As a national group, Wolf PAC is working in all 50 states and declares to have currently over 20,000 volunteers. The table below shows the status of Wolf PAC's legislation for every state in America. The District of Columbia has no say in the passage of amendments, so it is not listed here. Note that it is not uncommon for an introduced resolution to be left to a committee where it dies after the legislative session of that state ends without any voting or sufficient votes to move the motion forward (i.e. a death in committee). Such resolutions can simply be reintroduced in current sessions until a vote is called.

Vermont

On March 21, 2014, the Vermont Senate passed JRS 27, a Wolf PAC-backed resolution, in a bipartisan 25 to 2 vote. On May 2, 2014, the Vermont House passed the resolution by a vote of 95-43, making Vermont the first state in the nation to call for an Article V convention concerning campaign finance reform. The language of the resolution called for a convention "for the sole purpose of proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States of America that would limit the corrupting influence of money in our electoral process, including, inter alia, by overturning the Citizens United decision."

Sen Dick Sears, D-Bennington, was a key figure in passing the resolution. He received a call from a constituent and became convinced that the strategy made sense. "I think it's an important resolution," Sears said. "Congress isn't going to act, and we've got to do something to get this country back under control." When the resolution reached the House, an emotional plea from South Burlington farmer Benjamin Brown brought about a sense of urgency. "What am I going to tell my children, what am I going to be able to say to them about this democracy?" Brown asked the legislators. "Vermont has an opportunity to lead right now it's not left and right, it's an issue of democracy," he said. Rep. Mike Yantachka, D-Charlotte, agreed. He described the resolution as, "an opportunity to kick-start a movement that I hope will spread throughout the country and let people become aware of the real problems we have with the influence of money on elections and on our public policy." In contrast to these views, Senate Minority Leader Joe Benning, R-Caledonia, saw the resolution as a grave mistake. "I see it as an attack on free speech," Benning said. "I did not want to give my vote to something that clearly restricts free speech, because I think the First Amendment is one of the most important amendments we have, if not the most important."

California

On March 20, 2012, resolution was introduced in the California State Assembly, but was voted down in the Judiciary Committee. On January 30, 2014, the California State Assembly became the second state lower chamber to pass a resolution calling for a constitutional convention. On June 23, 2014, California became the second state in the nation to pass a resolution. The language of the resolution called for a convention "for the sole purpose of proposing an amendment to the United States Constitution that would limit corporate personhood for purposes of campaign finance and political speech and would further declare that money does not constitute speech and may be legislatively limited."

The state Senate voted 23-11 to support the resolution. Assemblyman Mike Gatto, the author of the resolution, remarked, "I doubt our founding fathers had the free-speech rights of multinational and foreign corporations in mind when they drafted the First Amendment." Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, D-Santa Barbara, recognized young people for their contribution to countering the Citizens United decision. "They have taken the lead in this effort," she observed, "because they recognize that the future of democracy, that their futures, that the future of this nation...are very much at risk as a result of this decision. Money is not speech. Corporations are not people. And up until the Supreme Court decision that flipped that on its head, that was the standard in the United States of America."

Illinois

On April 9, 2014, SJR 42 passed the Illinois Senate by a 37-15 vote. State Sen. Christine Radogno, R-Lemont, was the lone Republican state Senator to vote in favor of the resolution. On December 3, 2014, the Illinois House voted 74-40 in favor of the joint resolution, making Illinois the third state to pass such a resolution. The Illinois resolution called for a convention "in order to address concerns such as those raised by the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and related cases and events, including those occurring long before or afterward, or for a substantially similar purpose, and desires that the convention should be so limited."

Prior to the House vote, Harvard Law professor Lawrence Lessig testified before a House committee. "My ideal amendment is one that secures Congress the power to guarantee free and fair elections by making sure that we don't have a Congress that's dependent on raising millions," Lessig testified. "There are two things that have to change: the way we fund elections and the ability to eliminate entities like Super PACs from dominating the political arena.” John McGinnis, Northwestern University professor of constitutional law, disagreed with his assessment. "I think it's a very bad idea," he opined. "I think we should have more speech at the time of elections. This seems to me to make the United States system a less participatory system...I see this as an attempt by people like Professor Lessig and what I call the 'new class,' the media and academics, to restrict people who don't have opinions for a living from participating. If you look at the media and academics, they look a lot less diverse in their ideological views than rich people. Rich people are pretty divided between Republicans and Democrats."

New Jersey

A resolution to call for a constitutional convention to overturn Citizens United was introduced on August 11, 2014.

Testimony before the New Jersey Senate included speeches from Wolf Pac volunteers as well as an appearance from Americans for Prosperity. Wolf Pac saw the attendance by the latter group as a sign of concern from moneyed interests at the progress that has been made to counter the Citizens United decision.

On February 23, 2015, the New Jersey Assembly passed the resolution by a vote of 44-25, and New Jersey's became the fourth state legislature to adopt Wolf PAC's amendment resolution. The resolution called for a convention for the purpose of "proposing amendments to the Constitution of the United States that would limit the corrupting influence of money in our political system including overturning the decision of the United States Supreme Court in the case of Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission and related cases."

The resolution had previously been passed by the state Senate. "A constitutional convention is clearly needed to correct the disastrous impact of recent court decisions on the integrity of elections in New Jersey and throughout the nation," declared Assemblyman Dan Benson, D-Hamilton Township. "Citizens United opened the door to unlimited spending by shadowy, well-funded groups with no transparency or accountability – spending that drowns out the voice of the American voter and threatens the fundamental fairness of our democracy." Benson found some agreement across the aisle as Assemblyman Declan O'Scanlon, R-Little Silver, supported certain campaign funding restrictions. "We restrict corporations but not unions. Perhaps a convention like this would come up with solutions," O'Scanlon said. However, Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll, R-Morris Township, disagreed with the resolution. "America boosts a long and salutary tradition of robust forceful unrestrained political expression," Carroll said. "The influence of money is grossly understated. It profoundly insults the American people to imply or insert that they are so stupid that they can't make informed political decision that they cannot assess the merits of political arguments before them."

Rhode Island

Rhode Island adopted their resolution on June 17, 2016 - the fifth state to do so. The language of the Rhode Island resolution called for a convention "in order to address concerns such as those raised by the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission and related cases and events, including those occurring long before or afterward, or for a substantially similar purpose, and desires that the convention should be so limited."