OnTheIssuesLogo

Lisa Blunt Rochester on Government Reform

 

 


Overturn Citizens United decision by amending Constitution

Campaign Finance Reform and Expanding Voting Rights: "One person, one vote is the cornerstone of our country's political system. I will stand strong in my commitment to defend that principal so our leaders in Washington are only concerned with the will of the people." - Lisa Blunt Rochester

Over the last few decades there has been a shift in our politics to where money became more important than the will of the people. We reached a tipping point with the Citizens United decision in which the Supreme Court tore down the floodgates and let unlimited, unregulated money into our system. The Citizens United decision was an incredible mistake that works to prevent everyday Americans from having a say in the political process. If I'm elected, one of my top priorities will be to reform our campaign finance system, and we need to start by passing legislation that will overturn the Citizens United decision, even if that means amending the Constitution.

Source: 2016 Delaware House campaign website LisaBluntRochester.com , Nov 8, 2016

Institute same day voter registration

[We should] open up the voting process and make sure our government is truly representative of our state and our nation. We need to renew our commitment to voting rights and institute Same Day Voter Registration so everyone's voice can be heard. And we need to address the issue of gerrymandering - where congressional lines are sliced up to serve personal political interests, not to best represent our people. We need an impartial redistricting process in order to create districts that are contiguous and properly represent their constituents.
Source: 2016 Delaware House campaign website LisaBluntRochester.com , Nov 8, 2016

Establish "My Voice Voucher" small campaign contributions.

Blunt Rochester co-sponsored Government By the People Act

Congressional summary:

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.

Source: H.R.20 14-H0020 on Feb 5, 2014

Public financing of federal campaigns by voter vouchers.

Blunt Rochester co-sponsored H.R.20 & S.366

Congressional Summary:<

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.

Source: Government By the People Act 15_H020 on Jan 21, 2015

Statehood for the District of Columbia.

Blunt Rochester co-sponsored H.R.317

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

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.

Source: New Columbia Admission Act 15_H317 on Jan 13, 2015

Automatic voter registration for all citizens.

Blunt Rochester co-sponsored H.R.12 & S.1088

Congressional Summary:

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.

Source: Voter Empowerment Act 15-H12 on Mar 19, 2015

Holiday on election day; revamp for easier voting access.

Blunt Rochester voted YEA For the People Act of 2019

Opposing argument from the Heritage Foundation, 2/1/2019: HR1 federalizes and micromanages the election process administered by the states, imposing unnecessary mandates on the states and reversing the decentralization of the American election process. What HR1 Would Do:

Legislative outcome: Passed House 234-193-5 on 3/8/19; received with no action in Senate thru 12/31/2019

Source: Congressional vote 19-S949 on Jan 3, 2019

Sponsored bill to expand voter registration and voter access.

Blunt Rochester co-sponsored For the People Act

S.1 and H.R.1: For the People Act: This bill addresses voter access, election integrity and security, campaign finance, and ethics for the three branches of government:

Sen. John Thune in OPPOSITION (9/22/21): This radical legislation would provide for a massive federal takeover of our electoral system, chill free speech, and turn the Federal Election Commission--the primary enforcer of election law in this country--into a partisan body. This radical legislation would undermine state voter ID laws and make it easier for those here illegally to vote.

And, most of all, it would put Washington, not state governments, in charge of elections--for no reason at all. There is no systemic problem with state election laws. And state election officials do not need Washington bureaucrats dictating how many days of early voting they should offer, or how they should manage mail-in ballots.

Biden Administration in SUPPORT (3/1/21): In the wake of an unprecedented assault on our democracy, a never before seen effort to ignore, undermine, and undo the will of the people, and a newly aggressive attack on voting rights taking place right now all across the country, this landmark legislation is urgently needed to protect the fundamental right to vote and the integrity of our elections, and to repair and strengthen American democracy.

Legislative Outcome: Passed House 220-210-2 on March 3, 2021 (rollcall #62); received in the Senate on March 11; no further Senate action during 2021.

Source: S.1/H.R.1 21-HR1 on Jan 4, 2021

Sponsored impeachment of Trump for inciting insurrection.

Blunt Rochester voted YEA impeaching President Trump for inciting insurrection

GovTrack.us summary of H.Res.24: Article of Impeachment Against Former President Donald John Trump:

The House impeached President Trump for the second time, charging him with incitement of insurrection. The impeachment resolution accused the President of inciting the violent riot that occurred on January 6, when his supporters invaded the United States Capitol injuring and killing Capitol Police and endangering the safety of members of Congress. It cites statements from President Trump to the rioters such as `if you don`t fight like hell you`re not going to have a country anymore,` as well as persistent lies that he won the 2020 Presidential election.

Legislative Outcome:

Bill introduced Jan 11, 2021, with 217 co-sponsors; House rollcall vote #117 passed 232-197-4 on Jan. 13th (a YES vote in the House was to impeach President Trump for inciting insurrection); Senate rollcall vote #59 rejected 57-43-0 on Feb. 13th (2/3 required in Senate to pass; a YES vote in the Senate would have found President Trump guilty, but since he had already left office at that time, a guilty verdict would have barred Trump from running for President in the future)

Source: Congressional vote 21-HR24 on Jan 11, 2021

Sponsored bill for statehood for Washington D.C.

Blunt Rochester co-sponsored Washington D.C. Admission Act

Legislative Summary: This bill provides for admission into the United States of the state of Washington, Douglass Commonwealth, composed of most of the territory of the District of Columbia. The commonwealth shall be admitted to the Union on an equal footing with the other states. District territory excluded from the commonwealth shall be known as the Capital and shall be the seat of the federal government. The bill maintains the federal government`s authority over military lands and specified other property. The bill provides for expedited consideration of a joint resolution repealing the 23rd Amendment to the Constitution [the current rule for D.C.].

WETM 18-Elmira analysis: The House of Representatives passed a bill that would make Washington D.C. into a state. While Democrats say it`s time to make D.C. a state, Republicans say the motivation is purely political.

D.C. House Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D) introduced this bill and says district residents deserve full representation in Congress. `D.C. residents are taxed without representation and cannot consent to the laws under which they as American citizens must live,` Norton said.

While Democrats say this is about fairness, Republicans say this isn`t about the people, it`s about the politics. As a state, D.C. would likely add two new Democrats to the Senate.

`This is about a Democrat power grab,` Congressman Fred Keller (R-Penn.) said. Keller and Congressman James Comer (R-Ky.) say Democrats are forcing this issue through for one reason. `HR 51 is not really about voting representation. It`s about Democrats consolidating their power in Washington,` Comer said.

Legislative Outcome: Passed House 216-208-6 on 4/22/21 (rollcall #132); introduced in Senate with 45 co-sponsors but no further Senate action during 2021.

Source: H.R.51/S.51 21-HR51 on Jan 4, 2021

Sponsored "Protecting Our Democracy" to restrict president.

Blunt Rochester co-sponsored Protecting Our Democracy Act

H.R.5314, `Protecting Our Democracy Act,` addresses issues involving

  1. abuses of presidential power;
  2. checks and balances, accountability, and transparency; and
  3. election integrity and security.
Specifically, regarding abuses of presidential power, the bill:

Opinion by Rep. Brooks (R-AL-5) to vote NO, 12/9/21: Brooks voted `No` on H.R. 5314, a bill that perpetuates the now-debunked Russian Collusion claims that have resulted in indictments against the Democrat shills that fabricated it. Brooks said, `Trump Derangement Syndrome does not do justice to the word `obsession`. HR 5314 is a list of grievances against President Trump that go back to 2016.` Brooks concluded, `The American people would be better served if Socialist Democrats spent their time investigating Hunter Biden`s shady art and influence-peddling deals that reek of corruption. The American people would be better served if the House considered border security legislation, welfare give-a-way program rollbacks, or bills aimed at addressing rising prices. Instead, we`re wasting time on partisan, unnecessary legislation that`s going nowhere in the Senate.`

Legislative Outcome: Passed House 220-208-6 on 12/9/2021, Roll no. 440); introduced in Senate on 12/13/21; no further Senate action during 2021.

Source: H.R.5314/S.2921 21-HR5314 on Sep 21, 2021

Other candidates on Government Reform: Lisa Blunt Rochester on other issues:
DE Gubernatorial:
Bethany Hall-Long
John Carney
Matt Meyer
Mike Ramone
DE Senatorial:
Chris Coons
Eric Hansen
James DeMartino
Jessica Scarane
Lauren Witzke
Mike Katz
Tom Carper

DE politicians
DE Archives
Senate races 2024:
AZ: Kyrsten Sinema(I,incumbent)
vs.Ruben Gallego(D)
vs.Kari Lake(R)
vs.Mark Lamb(R)
CA: Laphonza Butler(D,retiring)
vs.Adam Schiff(D nominee)
vs.Steve Garvey(R nominee)
vs.Gail Lightfoot(L)
vs.Barbara Lee(D, lost primary)
vs.Katie Porter(D, lost primary)
CT: Chris Murphy(D,incumbent)
vs.John Flynn(R)
vs.Robert Hyde(R)
DE: Tom Carper(D,retiring)
vs.Eric Hansen(R)
vs.Michael Katz(I)
vs.Lisa Blunt Rochester(D)
FL: Rick Scott(R,incumbent)
vs.Debbie Mucarsel-Powell(D)
HI: Mazie Hirono(D,incumbent)
vs.Bob McDermott(R)
IN: Mike Braun(R,retiring)
vs.Jim Banks(R nominee)
vs.Valerie McCray(D nominee)
vs.Marc Carmichael(D, lost primary)
MA: Elizabeth Warren(D,incumbent)
vs.Shiva Ayyadurai(R)
vs.John Deaton(R)
MD: Ben Cardin(D,retiring)
vs.Larry Hogan(R)
vs.Robin Ficker(R)
vs.Angela Alsobrooks(D)
vs.David Trone(D)
ME: Angus King(I,incumbent)
vs.Demi Kouzounas(R)
vs.David Costello(D)
MI: Debbie Stabenow(D,retiring)
vs.Leslie Love(D)
vs.Peter Meijer(R)
vs.James Craig(R)
vs.Mike Rogers(R)
vs.Elissa Slotkin(D)
MN: Amy Klobuchar(DFL,incumbent)
vs.Royce White(R)
vs.Steve Carlson(DFL)
MO: Josh Hawley(R,incumbent)
vs.Karla May(D)
vs.Lucas Kunce(D)
MS: Roger Wicker(R,incumbent)
vs.Dan Eubanks(R)
vs.Ty Pinkins(D)
MT: Jon Tester(D,incumbent)
vs.Tim Sheehy(R)
vs.Brad Johnson(R,lost primary)
ND: Kevin Cramer(R,incumbent)
vs.Katrina Christiansen(D)

NE: Peter Ricketts(R,incumbent,2-year seat)
vs.Preston Love(D)
Deb Fischer(D,incumbent,6-year seat)
vs.Dan Osborn(I)
NJ: Bob Menendez(I,incumbent)
vs.Andy Kim(D)
vs.Curtis Bashaw(R)
vs.Tammy Murphy(D,withdrew)
NM: Martin Heinrich(D,incumbent)
vs.Nella Domenici(R)
NV: Jacky Rosen(D,incumbent)
vs.Jim Marchant (R)
vs.Sam Brown(R)
NY: Kirsten Gillibrand(D,incumbent)
vs.Mike Sapraicone(R)
vs.Josh Eisen(R,withdrew May 1)
OH: Sherrod Brown(D,incumbent)
vs.Bernie Moreno(R nominee)
vs.Frank LaRose(R, lost primary)
vs.Matt Dolan(R, lost primary)
PA: Bob Casey(D,incumbent)
vs.David McCormick(R)
RI: Sheldon Whitehouse(D,incumbent)
vs.Patricia Morgan(R)
vs.Allen Waters(R,withdrew)
TN: Marsha Blackburn(R,incumbent)
vs.Gloria Johnson(D)
vs.Marquita Bradshaw(D)
TX: Ted Cruz(R,incumbent)
vs.Colin Allred(D)
vs.Roland Gutierrez(D,lost primary)
vs.Carl Sherman(D,lost primary)
UT: Mitt Romney(R,retiring)
vs.John Curtis(R)
vs.Trent Staggs(R)
vs.Brad Wilson(R)
vs.Caroline Gleich(D)
VA: Tim Kaine(D,incumbent)
vs.Scott Parkinson(R)
VT: Bernie Sanders(I,incumbent)
vs.Gerald Malloy(R)
WA: Maria Cantwell(D,incumbent)
vs.Raul Garcia(R)
WI: Tammy Baldwin(D,incumbent)
vs.Eric Hovde(R)
vs.Phil Anderson(L)
WV: Joe Manchin III(D,retiring)
vs.Don Blankenship(D)
vs.Jim Justice(R)
vs.Alex Mooney(R)
vs.Glenn Elliott(D)
WY: John Barrasso(R,incumbent)
vs.Reid Rasner(R)
vs.Scott Morrow(D)
Abortion
Budget/Economy
Civil Rights
Corporations
Crime
Drugs
Education
Energy/Oil
Environment
Families
Foreign Policy
Free Trade
Govt. Reform
Gun Control
Health Care
Homeland Security
Immigration
Jobs
Principles
Social Security
Tax Reform
Technology
War/Peace
Welfare

Other Senators
Senate Votes (analysis)
Bill Sponsorships
Affiliations
Policy Reports
Group Ratings
[Title9]





Page last updated: Sep 08, 2024; copyright 1999-2022 Jesse Gordon and OnTheIssues.org