Voters overwhelmingly approved Amendment 65, a ballot measure that instructs the Colorado congressional delegation to propose, and the state legislature to ratify, an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to overturn Citizens United.

While the results are heralded by watchdog groups like Colorado Common Cause as a clear sign that Colorado voters want action on the issue of corporate political spending, the measure has no legal significance as it cannot force the state’s congressional delegation or legislature to take any action.

Initiative 166 passed yesterday, charging Montana’s officials to implement a policy that corporations are not human beings with constitutional rights.

The initiative is a reaction to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.

Additionally, Montana’s congressional delegation is now charged with offering an amendment to the United States constitution which would overturn the Citizens United decision, establish that corporations are not human beings with constitutional rights, establish that campaign contributions and expenditures by corporations be prohibited at any level of government, and achieve “a level playing field in election spending.”

The initiative also directs the state’s elected and appointed officials to regard “money as property, not speech.”

Lobbying

“Statehouse Live: At least 8 GOP legislators registered to attend ALEC meeting” by Scott Rothschild in the Lawrence Journal World.

Oklahoma: “Lobbyist gift-giving to Oklahoma lawmakers is up again for the third straight year” by Michael McNutt in the Oklahoman.

Campaign Finance

“Massachusetts Senate calls for Congress to pass law reversing Citizens United decision” by Robert Rizzuto in the Republican.

“Big campaign donors can remain a big secret” by Jon Murray and Mary Beth Schneider in the Indianapolis Star News.

Ethics

Alabama: “Lawmakers plan to run again as ‘double dipping’ ban looms” by Sebastian Kitchen in the Montgomery Advertiser.

Connecticut: “7 charged in Donovan probe” by Ken Dixon in the Connecticut Post.

Illinois: “Feds widen probe into newly retired South Side lawmaker” by Ray Long and Monique Garcia in the Chicago Tribune.

Illinois:  “Ex-Illinois lawmaker subpoenaed over scholarships” in the Quad-City Times.

South Carolina:  “Taxpayer bill for Haley ethics probe is $61,000” by Andrew Shain in the Charlotte Observer.

Utah: “Utah Supreme Court weighs fate of 2010 ethics initiative” by Cathy McKitrick in the Salt Lake Tribune.

Political Campaigns and Social Media

“New Site Seeks to Aggregate User-Generated Political Videos” by Miranda Neubauer in TechPresident.

Here is a video clip of C-Span’s Brian Lamb interviewing Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who discussed the Citizens United decision.

For the full story , be sure to read “Scalia Defends ‘Citizens United,’ Arizona Immigration Decision” by Tony Mauro in The Blog of LegalTimes.

You’ll find more of the coverage in the press here:

“Scalia: ‘We get clobbered by the press’” by Dylan Byers in Politico.

“Scalia Unconcerned About Money in Politics; People Aren’t ‘Sheep’” by Ariane de Vogue on ABC News.

“Scalia Defends Decision in Citizens United” on Capitol Correspondent.

“Justice Scalia downplays reports of discord on court” by Mark Sherman in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

“Senate heads for vote on disclosure of hidden donors” by Tom Curry in NBC Politics.

“Democratic super PACs reel in $25 million” by Dave Levinthal and Kenneth P. Vogel in Politico.

“Citizens United didn’t just open money floodgates for corporations” by Anjeanette Damon in the Las Vegas Sun.

Connecticut:  “Donovan campaign returns $27,660 in contributions” by Susan Haigh (Associated Press) in the Boston Globe.

Minnesota:  “Minnesota Republican Party fined; accused of illegal contributions, circumventing laws” by Bill Salisbury in the Pioneer Press.

Rhode Island:  “R.I. Rep. Langevin near paying off $127,000 campaign-finance fine” by Philip Marcelo.

Tennessee:  “PACs flood Tennessee General Assembly campaigns with cash” by Andy Sher in the Times Free Press.

The U.S. Supreme Court has invalidated a portion of Montana law which prohibits corporations from making independent expenditures in connection with a candidate or a political committee that supports or opposes a candidate or a political party.

In Western Tradition Partnership v. Bullock, the Court quoted from its prior Citizens United v FEC ruling that “political speech does not lose First Amendment protection simply because its source is a corporation.”

Four of the nine Justices dissented. The dissenting opinion quoted from the dissent in Citizens United, arguing “independent expenditures can be corrupting in much the same way as direct contributions.”

The dissenting opinion also argued the Citizens United ruling should not bar the Montana Supreme Court’s finding “that independent expenditures by corporations did in fact lead to corruption or the appearance of corruption in Montana.”

The dissent continued, “Given the history and political landscape in Montana, [The Montana Supreme Court] concluded that the State had a compelling interest in limiting independent expenditures by corporations. Thus, Montana’s experience, like considerable experience elsewhere since the Court’s decision in Citizens United, casts grave doubt on the Court’s supposition that independent expenditures do not corrupt or appear to do so.”

“State limits on corporation campaign contributions rejected by Supreme Court” by The Associated Press in the New Orleans Times-Picayune.

“Powerful congressman accused of campaign finance violations” by Scott Bronstein and Drew Griffin (CNN) in KTVQ.com.

Connecticut: “Malloy, legislature make last stab at campaign reform” by Mark Pazniokas in the CT Mirror.

Maryland: “Bartlett fined $5,000 by FEC for inaccurate campaign finance report filing” by The Associated Press in The Washington Post.

Massachusetts: “Massachusetts legislators calling for Constitutional Amendment to reverse Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision” by Michael Norton and Matt Murphy in MassLive.com.

New York: “With Cuomo, a New Group Will Push for Publicly Financed Elections” by Thomas Kaplan in The New York Times.

U.S. Representative Adam B. Schiff has introduced a constitutional amendment to reverse the resulting outcomes of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decisions in Citizens United and Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC V. Bennett, an Arizona public financing law struck down by the Court.

The amendment, proposed in House Joint Resolution 111, reads as follows: “Nothing in this Constitution shall be construed to forbid Congress or the states from imposing content-neutral limitations on private campaign contributions or independent political campaign expenditures. Nor shall this Constitution prevent Congress or the states from enacting systems of public campaign financing, including those designed to restrict the influence of private wealth by offsetting campaign spending or independent expenditures with increased public funding.”

In his press release, Congressman Schiff said: “I have always been loath to amend the constitution, but this tragic line of reasoning by the Supreme Court has so threatened the health of our democracy that I am moved to introduce today’s amendment.”

“Text Messages as Campaign Finance Reform?” by Quentin Fottrell in the Wall Street Journal.

“The Politics of Social Networking” by Damon Eris on the Independent Voter Network.

“At Meeting of Left’s Online Activists, Weighing Impact of Attack Ads” by Sarah Wheaton in The New York Times.

Alaska: “Will Citizens United result in Big Oil deciding who wins Alaska elections?” in the Alaska Dispatch.

District of Columbia:  “Ex-D.C. Council Chairman Pleads Guilty to Bank Fraud” by Tom Schoenberg in Bloomberg.

Georgia: “Taking the Pledge – Most see need for lobbyist gift cap” in the Marietta Daily Journal.

Kansas: “Voters will see big changes from new redistricting plan” by Scott Rothschild in the Lawrence Journal World.

New York: “Analysis: $2M gambling bet puts focus on lobbyist” by The Associated Press in The Wall Street Journal.

The Alaska Public Offices Commission has issued an opinion allowing a new independent group, Alaska Deserves Better (ADB), to raise and spend unlimited amounts of money in this year’s elections. Although the commission’s director said the advisory opinion is specific to ADB and the way it plans to operate, the decision seems to be relevant for other independent committees.

Under current state law, groups such as ADB may receive, each year, contributions of no more than $500 from an individual and $1,000 from a different group. Additionally, groups may not receive contributions from an individual who is not a resident of the state, or from a foreign national.

With the exception of the foreign national restriction, the opinion acknowledges laws prohibiting independent expenditures by corporations and labor unions are likely unconstitutional in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010. As a result, ADB, an independent expenditure group, can obtain contributions in unlimited amounts, with no restriction on the amounts or sources.

The commission acknowledges that without a ruling from a court or a change in legislation, there will not be clarity in the state’s campaign contribution law.

“Stevens: Citizens United decision needs adjusting” by The Associated Press in Politico.

“George Will column: Citizens United fears prove unnecessary” by George Will in the Green Bay Press-Gazette.

“Citizens: Speech, no consequences” by Richard L. Hasen in Politico.

“Super PAC donor lists include few women” by Stephanie Condon on CBSNews.com.

Campaign Finance

“Texas leads country in Super PAC giving — by a wide margin” by Emily Wilkins in the Houston Chronicle.

“17 funniest super PAC names” by Politico staff.

Louisiana: “Campaign donations for Gov. Jindal, others under scrutiny” by The Associated Press in the Daily Comet.

“Can State Laws Cohabit With Citizens United?” by Lincoln Caplan in the New York Times.

Lobbying

“K Street not thrilled with Tampa” by Anna Palmer in Politico.

Ethics

“Top N.H. pol quits; lied about work” by Mackenzie Weinger in Politico.

Campaign Finance

“How Citizens United Is Affecting Campaigns” by Stuart Rothenberg in Roll Call.

Massachusetts: “Mass. towns push against Citizens United” by The Associated Press in the Boston Globe.

Nevada: “Assembly GOP leader calls for campaign transparency” by Ed Vogel in the Las Vegas Review-Journal.

Nevada: “Attempt to amend campaign finance not a new concept, but will it work this time?” by David McGrath Schwartz in the Las Vegas Sun.

Lobbying

“White House visitor logs provide window into lobbying industry” by T.W. Farnam in The Washington Post.

“To get a voice in Tallahassee, local governments spend millions on lobbyists” by Tia Mitchell in The Miami Herald.

“RI Sen. Whitehouse, McCain ask U.S. Supreme Court to uphold Montana campaign finance restrictions” by John E. Mulligan in the Providence Journal.

“Can Montana brief end Citizens United?” by Adam Skaggs in Politico.

“Even Before ‘Citizens United,’ Big Donors Dominated” by Peter Overby on NPR.

“Closing arguments in John Edwards trial” by David Zucchino in the Los Angeles Times.

Illinois: “Illinois might nix money caps if super PACs enter fray” by The Associated Press in the News Gazette.

Virginia:  “Campaign finance law before appeals court in Richmond” by Larry O’Dell in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.