Good-government groups are criticizing the Supreme Court's decision Monday eliminating rules on how much a candidate can spend to pay back loans he or she made to the campaign.

The justices sided with Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, who sued over rules, which said a candidate can only raise $250,000 after an election to pay back a personal loan.

Aaron Scherb, senior director of legislative affairs for Common Cause, said this means big donors can funnel huge amounts of cash directly to newly elected officials.

"This decision is yet another example of the Supreme Court allowing more big money in politics and further opening the door to corruption and big moneyed interests calling the shots," Scherb contended.

The decision undermines part of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.

In the supporting brief, Chief Justice John Roberts said the rule placed too great a burden on core political speech. In a dissent, Justice Elena Kagan argued the decision, quote, "greenlights all the sordid bargains Congress thought it right to stop ... and can only bring this country's political system into further disrepute."

Scherb emphasized he hopes it will drum up more support for the DISCLOSE Act, which would require campaigns and groups spending money to influence politics to report more about their funding, but he is not optimistic.

"We're not holding our breaths that 10 Senate Republicans would vote for something like this," Scherb acknowledged. "But if more big money is going to be spent in politics, it absolutely has to be disclosed. The public deserves to see who's trying to influence their voices and their votes."

Support for this reporting was provided by The Carnegie Corporation of New York.

Indiana lawmakers are advancing a measure focused on parental rights.

Senate Bill 143 has passed the Senate Judiciary Committee with a 9-2 vote.

Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, chair of the Judiciary Committee, authored the bill. She said it aims to prohibit government entities from withholding information from parents about their children or denying parental access to such information. Brown noted the bill allows parents to take legal action for violations.

"We don't have any bill currently in the state of Indiana protecting parents' rights or delineating them," Brown pointed out. "I certainly appreciate all the voices that we've probably all heard on this bill. And I really appreciate everyone's patience with trying to get this right."

Critics, including the ACLU, warn the bill could force educators to disclose sensitive information, potentially harming LGBTQ+ students. The bill sparked significant debate, with supporters highlighting cases where parents felt excluded by state agencies or schools.

Sen. Rodney Pol, D-Michigan City, who voted against the bill, expressed doubts about its constitutionality, citing children's privacy rights.

"I feel like this bill is very, very broad and I feel like it is going to have a chilling effect," Pol explained. "My concern here is that in the intent of trying to protect children, we're going to ultimately put certain children in danger."

While parental rights legislation is part of a national trend -- 62 similar bills appeared in 24 states in 2023 -- Hoosiers remain divided on its effects. Some parents support transparency, while others caution against blanket policies which may not account for older children's privacy needs. The bill now heads to the full Senate for further debate.


get more stories like this via email

A new poll shows Vice President Kamala Harris' support for Israel's war in Gaza may have cost her the 2024 presidential election.

Nearly 30% of the 19 million voters who backed President Joe Biden in 2020, but chose to stay home in 2024, said Palestine was the reason.

University of New Hampshire PhD student Stephanie Black said she couldn't support Harris' complacency in genocide, so she voted third party.

"We are exhausted of a government that is not listening to student protesters," said Black, "that is not listening to international activism groups - the evidence that they are presenting."

Harris won New Hampshire, but in states that swung from blue to red in 2024, 20% of Biden supporters did not vote due to Gaza.

Black called the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas "a step in the right direction," but said it's important that enough aid now reaches the Palestinian people to recover and rebuild.

Prior to Biden withdrawing from the race, several progressive groups warned he could lose millions of young voters unless he cut off U.S. military support for Israel.

Harris made it clear she would not break from Biden's policies.

UNH PhD candidate Sebastian Rowan said the protest vote should not be blamed for Harris' loss, but rather the Democrats' failure to deliver for working people.

"The Democratic Party, in addition to continuing to send billions of dollars to Israel, wasn't offering anything meaningful for the working class," said Rowan. "Many people felt that we were being gaslighted into believing that the economy is actually great."

Twenty-four percent of non-voters who previously backed Biden cited the economy as the reason they chose not to vote last year.

Rowan said his protest vote was in no way a sign of support for President-elect Donald Trump.

He said students will continue to organize on campus and press school officials to divest from companies, which profit from the war in Gaza.

Support for this reporting was provided by Carnegie Corporation of New York.





get more stories like this via email

A group of University of Pennsylvania students got up close and personal with Keystone State voters recently as they studied solutions to bridging the ideological divide.

Students with Penn's Political Empathy Lab traveled across the state last summer and talked with people at parks, libraries and county fairs. The goal was to listen to Pennsylvanians as they discussed the issues in the 2024 campaign.

Lia Howard, professor of political science at the university and director of the lab, said the students emphasized using critical listening skills to understand the voters better.

"Democratic listening is one of the most important and undervalued things that are happening right now," Howard contended. "Because we're just so inundated by talk, expression, and we don't get enough time to practice listening to another human being."

Howard pointed out the students recorded 45 hours of audio during their sessions, producing a podcast series and presenting what they learned on and off campus. Another statewide tour is scheduled for this spring, and Howard added she will eventually publish the students' findings.

Howard noted the lab was formed to put into direct practice some of the theoretical concepts her students study and apply them to Pennsylvania during the 2024 election.

"We weren't trying to do polling or necessarily canvassing, though both are really important and I'm all for both," Howard explained. "That wasn't our role. It was really to think about what we were bringing and how we could connect."

The students traveled more than 2,500 miles across the state and learned about each city or town before engaging the voters. Howard emphasized the students found showing empathy as they listened often drew a higher degree of candor and openness in the responses they received.

"Empathy is something that you just practice. You have to do it to get it," Howard stressed. "I think it's worth working those muscles out, especially under times of duress. I think our country needs a lot more of that working out and building those muscles because we're a democracy, and that's what we need to do."

Penn has put together a program to extend the Political Empathy Lab's concept to other locations nationwide.

Support for this reporting was provided by Lumina Foundation.


get more stories like this via email