Why Overturning Citizens United Isn’t Enough - BY ADAM EICHEN

Found here. My comments in bold.

-----------------

You don't have to think our democracy works perfectly to be appalled at Donald Trump's attack on it. (The author is not off to a good start. In one perfunctory sentence are several howlers:

1. The article is supposed to be about Citizens United, not Trump
2. We don't have a democracy, we have a representative republic
3. The author admits our system doesn't work perfectly, yet doesn't tolerate Trump's "attack"
4. Trump did not "attack" democracy

But this is typical hyperbolic leftist rhetoric: Distract, distort, amplify, exaggerate.)
Amidst all the other headline-grabbing pronouncements in Wednesday night’s debate, Hillary Clinton mentioned the importance of overturning Citizens United. While this is encouraging, focusing on Citizens United is not enough; our campaign finance system was broken well before 2010. (I wonder if the author will be able to accurate identify what is wrong with "our campaign finance system.")

If Clinton is serious about reducing the role of money in politics, she should appoint Supreme Court justices willing to revisit Buckley v. Valeo, a 1976 decision that said (among other things) third parties could spend unlimited amounts to influence the outcome of an election, (Unfortunately for the author, the ACLU was one of the parties that brought the suit. And, the Justices were 8-1 in the ruling, with only Byron White dissenting. The court at that time included several heros of the Left, including Thurgood Marshall and Harry Blackmun,)

and First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, a decision two years later that struck down state attempts to limit corporate spending to affect ballot initiatives. Those cases formed the basis for our inability to regulate money in politics.

In their discussion of the Supreme Court, both candidates also failed to mention ("Failed to mention?" Somehow it's a failure to engage in a comprehensive dissertation during a political debate?)

Shelby County v. Holder (2013), the case that gutted the Voting Rights Act — arguably the most important piece of civil rights legislation ever passed. Since this disastrous decision, states across the country have passed anti-democratic measures (More hyperbole.)

that mandate voter IDs, enact draconian voter registration requirements, (The link is from The Nation, a leftist purveyor of agitprop. Reading the link , there is nothing anti-democratic about having requirements for those who engage in voter registration.)

reduce early voting, and eliminate preregistration for minors (among other measures). (All of these are perfectly reasonable.)

The next president must address this democratic crisis.Moreover, altering Supreme Court case law is not enough. To ensure fair elections it is essential to pass public financing of congressional elections, create independent redistricting commissions, and reduce lobbyist influence over public policy. (The author flippantly offers these as if they were uncontroversial and self-evident. But he's advocating the complete negation of several high court rulings; government funded elections; and treating the symptom that are lobbyists rather than the cause, which is big money in government. None of this will solve the problem of buying influence, because government is in control of trillions of taxpayer dollars with virtually no restraint on where those dollars can be spent. So there will always be lobbyists and big money, because government has so much power.)

Electoral integrity is a serious matter. The United States has a long way to go to ensure a fully functioning representative democracy. Yet, refusing to concede an election on fallacious grounds, as Trump did last night, is beyond inappropriate. (Was Al Gore's refusal to accept the results of the 2000 election similarly "beyond inappropriate?")

As law professor Rick Hasen wrote, “Our democracy is a fragile thing which depends upon accepting the rules of the game.”As Ari Berman argues, the election is “rigged,” but not in the way proclaimed by Trump. (Well, so the election IS rigged. I must inform the author that such comments are beyond inappropriate.)

The Republican nominee continues to lambaste the virtually non-existent voter fraud (an occurrence less likely than being struck by lightning), (A leftist meme continually trotted out whenever someone mentions the demonstrable large-scale voter fraud occurring.) 

while millions of Americans will be forced to sit out this election due to voter disenfranchisement. (that is, they don't bother to prove who they are, they let their voter registration lapse, they are former felons, or they are illegal aliens.)

Democracy is a living form of government, (Which is why I'm thankful we don't have democracy. There is nothing fair or just about a moving target when it comes to governance and elections.)

evolving over time and requiring constant vigilance to ensure proper representation; undermining the entire process, however, is childish and dangerous.