Why he's leaving the Senate

Senator Evan Bayh authored a lengthy op-ed in the New York Times this morning, explaining why he has chosen to leave the Senate. The senator cites legislative dysfunction as the main cause of his decision but quickly proceeds to a discussion of various ways to improve the legislative process. His suggestions for reform include changing the campaign finance laws to increase the power of small donors to counter corporate interests; revising the filibuster rules so that senators who want to filibuster must pledge to actually engage in continuous debate, not just threaten it, and requiring only 55 votes to break a filibuster; and inviting fellow senators over for dinner. This last suggestion may not seem as serious as some of the others, but Senator Bayh offers a strong counter to that claim: "It is much harder to demonize someone when you know his family or have visited his home." How very true.

Supreme Court Holds That Corporations Have First Amendment Right to Spend Money on Election Ads

This morning, the Supreme Court handed down its long-awaited decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. By a vote of five to four, the Court held that corporations have a First Amendment right to use money from their general treasuries to support or oppose candidates for public office. In so holding, the Court overruled two of its own major precedents. The Citizens United decision is expected to open the floodgates of corporate spending on election campaigns.

The full text of the Court's opinion can be found here. It is immensely long (183 pages!), but the Court's syllabus provides a good overview.

Here is the New York Times story on the case. A great roundup of today's coverage of the decision can be found on SCOTUSblog.