Email from Rural Americans United While Congress stalls and courts enable overreach, one state may have uncovered the path to restore democratic control.       What Is In This Newsletter? Montana Steps Up Against Citizens United Progressive Strategies NW Data: Hispanic Voter Turnout Twelve Billion Dollar Bailout, What a Buffoon   Have we finally found a way to deal a death blow to Citizens United? With the Supreme Court handing out unprecedented powers to the Executive branch like cake at a birthday party, and our Democratic members of Congress offering little more than strong rebukes, it often feels hopeless to reclaim lost ground. But while MAGA twists the rule of law into an unrecognizable pretzel, Montana may have found a way to put real teeth into trimming back the rampant oligarchic control of our government. Could it really be that easy? Anyone who has ever started a business knows that the first step is registering with a state. It does not have to be the state where you live, but it is at the state level that every business in the United States begins. Whether a single owner, partnership, LLC, non profit, or PAC, it all starts with state registration. From there, everyone must answer to the IRS, but depending on the type of business, additional federal filings may be required, such as with the Securities and Exchange Commission for finance or the Federal Election Commission for partisan federal elections. It is state authority that governs almost all of the rights and powers granted to a business. And this state authority is the key to undoing Citizens United. In Montana, of all places, this idea has taken hold under the name Transparent Election Initiative. The initiative is so clean in its design that it would be nearly impossible even for our MAGA friendly Supreme Court to overturn. Harvard Law weighed in on the subject. States rights in corporate governance are reinforced by hundreds of years of legal precedent. For the Supreme Court to overturn that doctrine would completely upend virtually every aspect of commerce and finance in this country. A real debacle. Of course, opposition exists, but it focuses on specific wording in the initiative, not the underlying concept. Is there a downside? Yes, and it mostly affects 501(c)(4) non profits. This designation allows non profits to engage in political activity, including spending up to forty nine percent of their budget on partisan politics. They can directly tell the public to vote for or against a candidate or a ballot initiative. Under the Transparent Election Initiative, 501(c)(4) corporations would lose the right to engage in partisan political activity. So where does that leave us? Surprisingly, with more room than it first appears. Political Action Committees are also corporations registered with the state, and therefore subject to state governance. In the Montana version of the Transparent Election Initiative, PACs are exempted, meaning they would retain the ability to engage in partisan politics, though without a tax exemption. Also, the line between partisan and non partisan political speech remains wide and usable. In practice, what you can say in advertising is only lightly restricted. It is far more likely that media platforms such as Facebook, radio, television, or newspapers will act as stronger censors than the Federal Election Commission, which oversees federal political messaging by 501(c)(4) organizations. If there is still a large gap in keeping big money out of partisan politics, is the Transparent Election Initiative still worth pursuing? Absolutely. It restricts businesses that exist for commerce to activities consistent with that purpose. And if an organization wants to engage in politics, it requires a separate corporate structure created specifically for that purpose, which increases transparency. An example of a non-partisan educational message. This billboard in Fairfield is one of nine billboards in Congressional District 5 hosted by Help Save America/ Prosperity Eastern Washington If there is still a large gap in keeping big money out of partisan politics, is the Transparent Election Initiative still worth pursuing? Absolutely. It restricts businesses that exist for commerce to activities consistent with that purpose. And if an organization wants to engage in politics, it requires a separate corporate structure created specifically for that purpose, which increases transparency. -Text and data provided by Progressive Strategies NW. Text has been edited to fit. In the 2025 General Election, turnout struggled most in Franklin and Yakima counties -- also Washington State's most Hispanic districts. That's not a coincidence. Especially in local elections, turnout struggles significantly among Hispanic voters. Estimates using voter names and location -- a statistical model of likely voter race -- indicate that only 14.5% of likely Hispanic voters returned a ballot, compared to 36.7% overall. Likely Native American voters also had very low turnout (17.5%). While turnout was higher among identified African-American (21.9%) and Asian (23.0%), it was much less than voters modeled as likely Caucasian (40.3%). This aligns with broader trends in local elections across the country. While socioeconomic factors like income certainly play a role, they are deeply intertwined with race, and race remains a distinct driver of turnout on its own. We see repeatedly that 'participation gaps' widen in off-cycle elections specifically for communities of color, regardless of other variables. These communities stand the most to gain electorally from fostering greater civic engagement. This is why the work of Rural Americans United is essential. When turnout collapses among Hispanic, and Native communities, the political power of rural Washington collapses with it, leaving our democracy less representative and the most affected voices pushed further to the margins. Rural Americans United exists to reverse that trend through voter education, targeted outreach, and pro democracy communication that narrows the participation gap and ensures every rural voter is seen, heard, and empowered. Your Donation Is Important Twelve Billion Dollar Bailout, What a Buffoon. Again many Washington State farmers get the shaft from 47 and Do Nothing Dan Newhouse. In forty seven’s first administration and now again, he started off with a temper tantrum and called it economic policy. To the rest of the world it was an opportunity to cash in and free themselves from dependence on the United States. During 47’s first administration I was living in Hong Kong, China. While he was boasting about bringing China to its knees with his trade war, I watched China laugh all the way to the bank as the United States ran up the largest trade imbalance in recent history with China. That trade war was so devastating to American farmers that twenty three billion dollars in bailout money was spent to offset farming losses. This time around, 47, in true MAGA style, doubled down on the disaster. Instead of losing only to China, we have now managed to lose to the world. When 47 attacked all countries, they collectively responded with a global economic reset that excluded the United States. It is questionable whether the United States can ever fully recover. When our main trading partners, China, Canada, and Mexico, secured markets outside the United States for trade, they placed themselves in a far stronger economic position. They no longer have to worry about the petulant and rancid tirades of a man who behaves erratically, and they do not have to consider the moral implications of trading with a country that so easily abuses its citizens and ignores established laws and conventions. How specifically does Washington lose? Not all farmers in Washington will miss out. The United States Department of Agriculture has published a list of crops that are eligible for a one time payment. What is again blatantly obvious is the absence of fruit farmers. Do Nothing Dan failed to move the Farm Bill forward, which opened the door for it to be gutted by the Big Beautiful Bill. He has supported all of 47's disastrous economic decisions, and not once has he stood up to ensure that fruit ranchers are included in the framework of agricultural support. Rural Americans United is working to counter this failure by amplifying rural voices, exposing the harm these policies cause, and delivering pro democracy messaging that holds leaders accountable to the communities they ignore.   Your Donation Is Important   Rural Americans United   Rural Americans United | 420 South 72nd Avenue Suite 180 PMB 110 | Yakima, WA 98908 US Unsubscribe | Update Profile | Constant Contact Data Notice