Michelle Lujan-Grisham on Government Reform

Thanks to Citizens United, our electoral system is broken

Reveal political donors; reverse Citizens United

Michelle Lujan-Grisham (D): Yes, on disclosure. Sponsored bills to reverse Citizens United, & require tax-exempt social welfare organizations that run political ads to reveal donors.

Steve Pearce (R): Supported Citizens United. No position on disclosure bills. Voted to defund House Ethics office after it investigated his staffer.

No voter ID laws; no purging of voter rolls

Michelle Lujan-Grisham (D): No. "Burdensome voter ID laws & purging of voter registration rolls . disproportionately impact poor, elderly, disabled & Americans of color."

Steve Pearce (R): Yes. Voted for photo ID in federal races.

Establish "My Voice Voucher" small campaign contributions.

Congressional summary:

• A refundable tax credit of 50% of congressional House campaign contributions, to be known as `My Voice Federal` contributions.
• Establishes the Government by the People Oversight Commission, which will launch a pilot program and select 3 eligible states to operate a voucher pilot program.
• Provide each qualified individual during the election cycle, upon his or her request, with a `My Voice Voucher` worth $50 (in either paper or electronic form).
• Authorizes the individual to submit the My Voice Voucher to qualified federal election candidates, allocating a portion of its value in $5 increments.
• Prohibits a certified participating candidate from establishing or controlling a leadership PAC (political action committee).

Proponent`s argument in favor (by Reps. Nancy Pelosi & John Sarbanes): Citizens United shook the foundation of our democracy: the principle that it is the voices of the people, not the bank accounts of the privileged few, that determine the outcome of our elections and the policies of our government. Most members of Congress would leap at the chance to fund their campaigns without having to turn to a familiar cast of big donors and entrenched interests. Today, that`s virtually impossible. But we can and must break the grip of special interests on our politics: rally around H.R. 20.

Opponent`s argument against (The Examiner): The proposed legislation seeks to undo the Citizens United v. FEC ruling which has been a thorn in the side of progressives ever since the Supreme Court ruled in 2010 that political spending was `a form of protected speech under the First Amendment.` Although the `Government by the People Act` innocently claims to want to get big money out of politics, the real goal is to smash the Tea Party. The fear that conservative groups would have access to funds typically granted to progressive groups and unions was too much to bear.

No photo IDs to vote; they suppress the vote.

Congressional Summary:Amends the Voting Rights Act of 1965 with respect to the requirement that a federal court retain jurisdiction for an appropriate period to prevent commencement of new devices to deny or abridge the right to vote. Expands the types of violations triggering the authority of a court to retain such jurisdiction to include certain violations of the Act as well as violations of any federal voting rights law that prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or membership in a language minority group. [This bill would ban requiring photo IDs in order to vote].

Opponents recommend voting NO because:Sen. Bob Dole (on related bill from 2007, whether to add an amendment allowing photo ID): I am proposing a commonsense measure to uphold the integrity of Federal elections. My amendment to require voters to show photo identification at the polls would go a long way in minimizing potential for voter fraud. When a fraudulent vote is cast and counted, the vote of a legitimate voter is cancelled. This is wrong, and my amendment would help ensure that one of the hallmarks of our democracy, our free and fair elections, is protected. Opinion polls repeatedly confirm that Americans overwhelmingly support this initiative.

Proponents support voting YES because:Sen. Dianne Feinstein (on related bill from 2007): If one would want to suppress the vote in the 2008 election, one would vote [for Dole`s amendment] this because this measure goes into effect January 1, 2008. It provides that everybody who votes essentially would have to have a photo ID. If you want to suppress the minority vote, the elderly vote, the poor vote, this is exactly the way to do it. Many of these people do not have driver`s licenses. This amendment would cost hundreds of millions of dollars to actually carry out. It goes into effect--surprise--January 1, 2008 [to affect the presidential election].

Automatic voter registration for all citizens.

Congressional Summary:

• Require each state to make available official public websites for online voter registration.
• Authorizes automated voter registration and establishes same day registration, and voter registration of individuals under 18 years of age.
• Declares that the right to vote shall not be denied because that individual has been convicted of a criminal offense.

Supporters reasons for voting YEA: (BrennanCenter.org): Too many Americans go to vote on Election Day only to find their names are not on the voter rolls--often, wrongly deleted. The US is on the verge of a new paradigm for registering voters: automatic, permanent registration of eligible voters, which would add up to 50 million eligible voters to the rolls.

Opponents reasons for voting NAY: (Gov. Christie`s veto message on the `Democracy Act`, Nov. 2015): Christie called a provision establishing automatic voter registration that requires New Jerseyan to opt out a `government-knows-best, backwards approach that would inconvenience citizens and waste government resources for no justifiable reason.` Automatic voter registration would have added 1.6 million people to the state`s voter rolls.

(PopVox.org blog)
• TN-8: I have voted in every election federal, state or local that I chose to. If people want to vote there is nothing but laziness preventing them from doing so today! Regarding photo ID`s you have one to drive, buy alcohol, and go to the doctor.
• AL-2: This bill is so general that anyone that is alive, has lived, or will live in this century will be able to vote as well as non-Americans, pets, people without voting rights, and some people multiple times.
• TN-3: This bill will surely bring about fixed voting in favor of the one who can cheat the most. How about having a voter photo card and a test to see if they are capable of voting and not just voting for whoever promises them more free stuff.

Public financing of federal campaigns by voter vouchers.

Congressional Summary:<

• Allow a refundable tax credit of 50% of cash contributions to congressional House campaigns, to be known as `My Voice Federal` contributions.
• Select three states to operate a voucher pilot program.
• Provide, upon request, a `My Voice Voucher` worth $50.
• Authorizes the individual to submit the My Voice Voucher to qualified federal election candidates, allocating a portion of its value in $5 increments.
• Permits an individual to revoke a My Voice Voucher within two days after submitting it to a candidate.
• Establishes the Freedom From Influence Fund in the Treasury [for 6-to-1 matching funds for the vouchers].
• Allows taxpayers to designate overpayments of tax for contribution to the Freedom From Influence Fund.

Supporters reasons for voting YEA:Rep. Sarbanes: Big money warps Congress` priorities and erodes the public`s trust in government. This bold new legislation returns voice and power back to the American people:

1. Empower everyday citizens to fuel Congressional campaigns by providing a My Voice Tax Credit.
2. Amplify the voices of everyday Americans through a 6-to-1 match.
3. Prevent Super PACs from drowning out small donor-backed candidates.

Opponents reasons for voting NAY:(Bill Moyers, Feb. 19, 2015): This citizen engagement strategy, particularly when used to court small donors, is not without its critics. Small donors, at least in the current system, often tend to be political ideologues. That trend leaves many asking: won`t moving to small donors just empower extremists? Sarbanes counters, if Congress changes the political fundraising rules, they will also change the calculus for `the rational small donor who right now isn`t going to give $25 because they`ve figured out that it`s not going to matter.` The prospect of a 6-to-1 match might very well impact how those less ideologically extreme potential donors think about political giving.

No separate contribution limits for party activities.

Congressional Summary: To repeal the Federal Election Campaign provisions which established separate contribution limits for contributions made to national parties to support Presidential nominating conventions, national party headquarters buildings, and recounts.

Supporters reasons for voting YEA: Rep. KILMER. This legislation repeals the last-minute changes to campaign finance law that were tacked into a 1,600-page bill to fund the government. As a result of this legislation, the wealthiest donors can now each contribute more than $750,000 per year to a political party, more than seven times the previous cap. Worst of all, these changes were buried in a bill with no hearing and no public debate. This bill protects the interests of `We the People` and make sure that the wealthiest donors don`t get another chance to flood our elections with even more money and to undermine our democracy.

Opponents reasons for voting NAY: (Washington Post article, Oct. 9, 2014): The FEC said that contributions to presidential convention committees will not count against the annual limit on donations to national parties--allowing wealthy donors to double their support for party operations. The FEC`s move came in response to a rare joint request by the Democratic National Committee and the Republican National Committee, which argued that they needed a new avenue to raise funds for the events after a federal law eliminated public funding for the conventions. But critics of the decision said the FEC created an end-run around federal contribution limits. Under the current rules, individuals can give up to $32,400 per year to a national party committee. Now, donors will be able to give an additional $32,400 each year to a separate committee set up to finance the quadrennial convention. That means that a single donor could give nearly $130,000 to support a party and its convention in a two-year election cycle.

Statehood for the District of Columbia.

Congressional Summary: Sets forth procedures for admission into the United States of the state of New Columbia.

• Requires the Mayor of the District of Columbia to submit to the voters propositions for statehood and adoption of a State Constitution, and issue a proclamation for the first elections to Congress of two Senators and one Representative of New Columbia.
• Requires the President to issue a proclamation announcing the results and admitting New Columbia into the Union.
• Provides for conversion of District government offices to state offices.

Opponents reasons for voting NAY: (DCist.com, Sept. 2014): The Argument Against: Congress does not have the authority to grant statehood to D.C.; the 23rd amendment, which gave D.C. three electoral votes, would have to be repealed before statehood was granted. Washington is a wholly urban, one-industry town, dependent on the federal government far in excess of any other state. Moreover, with Congress no longer having authority over New Columbia but dependent on it, New Columbia could exert influence on the federal government far in excess of any other state.

Supporters reasons for voting YEA: [Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-DC; the District of Columbia has one representative to Congress and no Senators; Rep. Holmes can introduce bills but her vote does not count]: This 51st state would have no jurisdiction over the federal territory or enclave that now consists of the Washington that Members of Congress and visitors associate with the capital of our country. Those would remain under federal jurisdiction. The New Columbia Admission Act was the first bill I introduced in 1991. Statehood is the only alternative for the citizens of the District of Columbia. To be content with less than statehood is to concede the equality of citizenship that is the birthright of our residents as citizens of the United States.

Click here for definitions & background information on Government Reform. Click here for a summary of all issue stances of Michelle Lujan-Grisham. Click here for a Wikipedia profile of Michelle Lujan-Grisham. Click here for a Ballotpedia profile of Michelle Lujan-Grisham. Click here for VoteMatch responses by Michelle Lujan-Grisham. Click here for issue positions of other NM politicians. Click here for NM primary archives. Click here for NM secondary archives.
Other governors on Government Reform:			Michelle Lujan-Grisham on other issues:
[Title7]	Gubernatorial Debates 2021: CA Recall: S.D.Mayor Kevin_Faulconer(R) vs.Former Gov. nominee John Cox(R) vs.Former U.S.Rep Doug Ose(R) vs.Laura Smith(R) vs.Former Olympian Caitlyn Jenner(R) vs.Radio Host Larry Elder(R) vs.Kevin Paffrath(D) vs.Gavin Newsom(D) NJ: Incumbent Phil Murphy(D) vs.State Rep. Jack Ciattarelli(R) vs.Candidate Hirsh Singh(R) vs.GOP Chair Doug Steinhardt(R) VA: Incumbent Ralph Northam(D,term-limited) vs.Former Governor Terry McAuliffe(D) vs.CEO Glenn Youngkin(R) vs.A.G. Mark Herring(D) vs.State Sen. Amanda Chase(I) vs.Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax(D) vs.State Rep. Jennifer Carroll Foy(D) vs.State Rep. Lee Carter(D) vs.State Sen. Jennifer McClellan(D) vs.State Rep. Kirk Cox(R) vs.CEO Pete Snyder(R) Gubernatorial Debates 2023: KY: Incumbent Andy Beshear(D) vs.State A.G. Daniel Cameron(R) vs.Ambassador Kelly Craft(R) vs.State Auditor Mike Harmon(R) LA: Incumbent John Bel Edwards(D,term-limited) vs.Biden Adviser Cedric Richmond(? D) vs.Senator John Neely Kennedy(? R) vs.Mitch Landrieu(D ?) MS: Incumbent Tate Reeves(R) vs.Bill Waller(R) Gubernatorial Debates 2022: AK: Incumbent Mike Dunleavy(R) vs.Bill Walker(I) vs.Les Gara(D) vs.Billy Toien(L) vs.State Rep. Chris Kurka(R) AL: Incumbent Kay Ivey(R) vs.Chris Countryman(D) vs.Yolanda Flowers(D) vs.Stacy Lee George(R) vs.Ambassador Lynda Blanchard(R) vs.State Sen. Malika Sanders-Fortier(D) vs.Challenger Tim James(R) AR: Incumbent Asa Hutchinson(R,term-limited) vs.Trump Adviser Sarah Huckabee Sanders(R) vs.A.G. Leslie Rutledge(R,withdrew Nov.2021) vs.Ricky Dale Harrington(L) vs.Anthony Bland(D) vs.Chris Jones(D) AZ: Incumbent Doug Ducey(R,term-limited) Mayor Marco Lopez(D) vs.Former news anchor Kari Lake(R) vs.Secretary of State Katie Hobbs(D) vs.State Treasurer Kimberly Yee(R) vs.U.S.Rep.Matt Salmon(R) vs.Steve Gaynor(R) vs.State Rep.Aaron Lieberman(D) vs.Jorge Rivas(R) vs.Karrin Taylor Robson(R) CA: Incumbent Gavin Newsom(D) vs.S.D.Mayor Kevin_Faulconer(R) vs.Former Gov. nominee John Cox(R) vs.Kevin Paffrath(D) vs.State Sen. Brian Dahle(R) vs.State A.G. Rob Bonta(D for AG) CO: Incumbent Jared Polis(D) vs.Mayor Greg Lopez(R) vs.Heidi Ganahl(R) CT: Incumbent Ned Lamont(D) vs.Bob Stefanowski(? R) FL: Incumbent Ron DeSantis(R) vs.Former Gov.Charlie Crist(D) vs.Agriculture Commissioner Nikki Fried(D) vs.Annette Taddeo(D) vs.Brian Moore(G) GA: Incumbent Brian Kemp(R) vs.Minority Leader Stacey Abrams(D) vs.Senate candidate Shane Hazel(L) vs.State Rep.Vernon Jones(R) vs.2020 candidate Kandiss Taylor(R) vs.Senator David Perdue(R) HI: Incumbent David Ige(D,term-limited) vs.Former Lt.Gov.Duke Aiona(R nominee) vs.Marissa Kerns(R) vs.Lt.Gov.Josh Green(D nominee) vs.Vicky Cayetano(D) vs.Paul Morgan(R) vs.State Rep.Kirk Caldwell(D) vs.U.S.Rep.Kai Kahele(D) IA: Incumbent Kim Reynolds(R) vs.Deidre DeJear(D) vs.State Rep.Ras Smith(D) ID: Incumbent Brad Little(R) vs.Stephen Heidt(D) vs.Raul Labrador(R) vs.Lt. Gov. Janice McGeachin(R) vs.Ammon Bundy(R) vs.Ed Humphreys(R) IL: Incumbent J.B. Pritzker(D) vs.State Sen.Darren Bailey(R) vs.Paul Schimpf(R) vs.Jesse Sullivan(R) vs.Richard Irvin(R) KS: Incumbent Laura Kelly(D) vs.Jeff Colyer(R) vs.State Sen.Derek Schmidt(R) vs.Chase LaPorte(R)	Gubernatorial Debates 2022 (continued): MA: Incumbent Charlie Baker(R) vs.Lt.Gov.Karyn Polito(R) vs.State Rep. Geoff Diehl(R) vs.Harvard Professor Danielle Allen(D) vs.State Sen.Ben Downing(D) vs.State Sen.Sonia Chang-Diaz(D) vs.Shiva Ayyadurai(I) vs.A.G. Maura Healey(D) MD: Incumbent Larry Hogan(R,term-limited) vs.State Del.Robin Ficker(R) vs.State Del.Peter Franchot(D) vs.State Del.Kelly M. Schulz(R) vs.Secretary John B. King(D) vs.Ashwani Jain(D) vs.State A.G. Doug Gansler(D) vs.County Exec. Rushern Baker(D) vs.Secretary Thomas Perez(D) vs.Wes Moore(D) vs.Dan Cox(R) ME: Incumbent Janet Mills(D) vs.Former Gov. Paul LePage(R) MI: Incumbent Gretchen Whitmer(D) vs.Chief James Craig(R) vs.Police Chief Tudor Dixon(R) vs.Garrett Soldano(R) vs.John E. James(? R) MN: Incumbent Tim Walz(DFL) vs.Mayor Mike Murphy(R) vs.State Sen.Scott Jensen(R) vs.Michelle Benson(R) vs.Paul Gazelka(R) NE: Incumbent Pete Ricketts(R,term-limited) vs.U.S.Senator Bob Krist(R) vs.Chuck Herbster(R) vs.Jim Pillen(R) vs.Brett Lindstrom(R) vs.Carol Blood(D) vs.State Sen. Theresa Thibodeau(R) NH: Incumbent Chris Sununu(R) vs.Dan Feltes(D) vs.Karen Testerman(R) vs.Dr.Tom Sherman(D) NM: Incumbent Michelle Lujan Grisham(D) vs.Commissioner Jay Block(R) vs.State Rep.Rebecca Dow(R) vs.Mark Ronchetti(R) NV: Incumbent Steve Sisolak(D) vs.A.G.Adam Laxalt(R) vs.North Las Vegas Mayor John Lee(R) vs.Dean Heller(R) vs.Joe Lombardo(R) vs.Mayor Michele Fiore(R) NY: Incumbent Andrew Cuomo(D,resigned) vs.Acting Gov.Kathy Hochul(D) vs.Joe Pinion(R) vs.Rob Astorino(R) vs.Andrew Giuliani(R) vs.US.Rep.Lee Zeldin(R) vs.Tom Suozzi(D) vs.Attorney General Letitia James(D) OH: Incumbent Mike DeWine(R) vs.Former Rep.Jim Renacci(R) vs.Dayton Mayor Nan Whaley(D) vs.Mayor John Cranley(D) OK: Incumbent Kevin Stitt(R) vs.State Sen. Ervin Yen(R) vs.Connie Johnson(D) vs.Joy Hofmeister(D) vs.Natalie Bruno(L) OR: Incumbent Kate Brown(D,term-limited) vs.Gov. nominee Bud Pierce(R) vs.Paul Romero(R) vs.Casey Kulla(D) vs.Kerry McQuisten(R) vs.Tina Kotek(D) vs.Nicholas Kristof(D) vs.Tobias Read(D) vs.State Rep. Christine Drazan(R) vs.Julian Bell(D) PA: Incumbent Tom Wolf(D,term-limited) vs.U.S.Rep. Lou Barletta(R) vs.Commissioner Joe Gale(R) vs.A.G.Josh Shapiro(D) vs.William McSwain(R) vs.U.S.Rep.Melissa Hart(R) vs.State Sen.Scott Martin(R) vs.State Sen. Scott Martin(R) vs.State Sen. Doug Mastriano(R) RI: Incumbent Gina Raimondo(D,to Cabinet) vs.Gov. Dan McKee(D) vs.Ashley Kalus(R) vs.Mayor Allan Fung(R) vs.Secy.Matt Brown(D) vs.Luis-Daniel Munoz(D) vs.RI Secretary of State Nellie Gorbea(D) vs.Seth Magainer(D) vs.Helena Foulkes(D) SC: Incumbent Henry McMaster(R) vs.US.Rep.Joe Cunningham(D) vs.State senator Mia McLeod(D) SD: Incumbent Kristi Noem(R) vs.State Rep. Billie Sutton(? D) vs.Speaker Steven Haugaard(R) vs.Jamie R. Smith(D) TN: Incumbent Bill Lee(R) vs.Jason Martin(D) vs.Carnita Atwater(D) vs.J B Smiley(D) TX: Incumbent Greg Abbott(R) vs.Beto O`Rourke(D) vs.Chad Prather(R) vs.State Sen.Don Huffines(R) vs.U.S.Rep. Allen West(R) vs.Deirdre Gilbert(D) VT: Incumbent Phil Scott(R) vs.Brenda Siegel(D) WI: Incumbent Tony Evers(D) vs.Tim Michels(R) vs.CEO Jonathan Wichmann(R) vs.Rebecca Kleefisch(R) vs.State Rep. Timothy Ramthun(R) WY: Incumbent Mark Gordon(R) vs.Theresa Livingstone(D) vs.Rex Rammell(R)	Abortion Budget/Economy Civil Rights Corporations Crime Drugs Education Energy/Oil Environment Families/Children Foreign Policy Free Trade Govt. Reform Gun Control Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Infrastructure/Technology Jobs Local Issues Principles/Values Social Security Tax Reform War/Iraq/Mideast Welfare/Poverty [Title9]