Editor’s Note: This piece is the third in the Democracy Project’s "What's Next?" series, which analyzes democratic reforms.

Understanding where we are requires asking how we got here. The predominant factor undermining democratic governance during my time in office is the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v FEC.

Fifteen years ago, as Montana’s attorney general, I led a bipartisan coalition of a majority of states, urging restraint in allowing unlimited corporate spending in our elections.  Overturning cases dating back to the 1970s, the Court held otherwise, granting corporations the same rights as people and asserting (1) that there will be disclosure so that “citizens can see whether elected officials are in the pocket of so-called moneyed interests” and (2) because the spending is legally independent, “the appearance of influence or access, furthermore, will not cause the electorate to lose faith in our democracy.”

More than just corporate spending, Citizens United opened the door to the rise of unregulated “dark money”—groups that spend unlimited amounts of money to influence our elections, without disclosing who is footing the bill.  These groups hide behind various forms of corporate organization and tax status, and names that tell us nothing about who they are, what they believe in, and where the money comes from—all while living out of a P.O. Box in Washington D.C.

In the first major challenge two years after Citizens United, by a 5-4 decision, the Court summarily discarded a century of Montana law protecting our elections and policymaking from corporate corruption.  Writing for the dissent, Justice Breyer read into the future, observing that our state’s long experience with outside spending, “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.”

The rise in outside and undisclosed spending parallels the erosion of democracy.  In 2008, individuals, parties and groups spent $168.9 million in federal races to advocate for or against presidential candidates.  In 2024 independent expenditures in federal races were approximately $4.4 billion, with over $1.9 billion in undisclosed spending. 

Outside money not only impacts our campaigns, it impacts what comes out of Washington. Big companies and special interests don’t spend out of the generosity of their big corporate hearts.  Members of Congress are now willing to say the quiet part out loud: legislation is passed to keep the campaign dollars flowing. 

And unlimited spending also impacts trust in our institutions of government.  When people no longer believe they have a shot at influencing elections and the activities of representative democracy, if they believe their voice doesn’t count because it’s not backed by an unlimited bank account, trust in government disappears. And when trust in government disappears, it gives rise to the dangerous discourse and divisiveness we’ve seen everywhere from Washington, D.C. to our Facebook feeds. Government becomes the enemy instead of a partner in improving our lives. Divisions become deeper, with each side more interested in placing blame for what we have become, rather than working with and inspiring each other to be better.

Even under Citizens United, we can curb the influence of outside money and help restore Americans’ belief that government can work for them, not the corporations and special interests.    

First, let’s end dark money.  As governor, I worked with Republicans and Democrats to enact one of the most stringent campaign finance disclosure laws in the country, requiring dark money groups to report all contributors and spending occurring within 90 days of our elections. Dark money stayed out of our state elections, and the Supreme Court rejected a request to declare our law unconstitutional.  Similar anti-dark money provisions passed the U.S. House in 2021.

Even if Congress won’t act, the next President can. In 2018, I signed a first-in-the-nation executive order requiring government contractors to disclose all the ways they are spending or contributing to impact our elections. There is no reason this can’t be done at the federal level.

And when it comes to corporate spending in our elections, the very existence and powers of corporations are set by state law.  To curb corporate corruption of our democracy, we need to start looking to the corporate codes, not just the election laws.  Once again, Montana is in the lead in charting this path. 

The success we’ve had fighting this fight in Montana — a state that voted overwhelmingly for Donald Trump — is proof that Americans, regardless of political party, support fixing a broken system. Our American democracy depends on us doing so.