Just when you thought they were gone for good, they rise again. No, I’m not talking about undead bodies crawling up from the grave to terrify the living. I’m talking about outdated policy ideas chilling free speech and invading personal privacy in the age of social media, doxing, and political violence.

The push to restrict First Amendment rights, expand IRS power, and unmask nonprofit donors keeps lurching back toward Congress, but it’s chasing a past that no longer exists. Some ideas just don’t know when to rest in peace.

On September 17, a small group of Democrats in Congress reintroduced a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United v. FEC, the 2010 Supreme Court decision which upheld a nonprofit organization’s right to distribute and advertise a documentary film criticizing then-presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Citizens United was one of a handful of court decisions that reshaped the campaign finance landscape from 2007 to 2014, making it easier for independent groups like super PACs and social welfare organizations to raise and spend money on political speech. At the time, many commentators predicted the decision would benefit pro-business Republicans and heighten the importance of campaign spending in elections.

Concurrently, many liberals also believed in the Emerging Democratic Majority, a theory which argued Republicans could no longer compete in national elections due to the country’s increasingly diverse population. Unsurprisingly, Democratic leaders in that era fixated on ways Republicans might seek to undermine the will of the majority they expected to lead for years to come. As a result, they spent a lot of time fighting for things like independent redistricting commissions, more permissive rules for voter registration and ID, and various efforts to overturn or undermine decisions like Citizens United which allowed conservatives to take their message directly to the voters. 

15 years later, however, predictions about the effects of Citizens United and the Emerging Democracy Majority are both in shambles. While Republican-aligned groups did outspend their Democratic-aligned counterparts for a few elections in the 2010s, things shifted dramatically in 2016. That year, Donald Trump won the White House despite being heavily outspent by his opponent, Hillary Clinton. In the latter half of the decade and into the 2020s, liberals and progressives built an impressive network of independent groups to compete with and even surpass conservatives in spending. Yet despite this, Trump achieved what many had deemed impossible for Republicans by winning the popular vote in 2024.

Today, it’s a lot clearer that money doesn’t buy elections, and that majorities can shift in unexpected ways at any time. Nevertheless, efforts to protect the establishment from criticism by overturning Citizens United march on, even as the left’s grip on the establishment weakens by the day.

Then, there’s Rep. Jason Crow (D-CO) and his “End Dark Money Act,” which would empower Trump’s IRS to create new regulations governing the political activities of nonprofit organizations. That may sound like a bizarre priority amid reports that Trump is exploring ways to use the IRS to hound progressive nonprofits and donors – efforts which have sparked fierce condemnations and demands for investigations from Democrats in the House and Senate. But like the constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, Rep. Crow’s bill is another ‘zombie’ proposal from a previous era.

Specifically, the “End Dark Money Act” was motivated by the aftermath of the IRS Tea Party targeting scandal, when Congress froze the current regulations in place after losing faith in the IRS’s ability to craft or implement new rules fairly. Citing the rise of so-called “dark money,” some Democrats opposed the freeze, preferring the IRS to create stricter rules. Since then, however, nonprofit political advocacy has grown into a bigger force on the left than the right. Meanwhile, fears of an IRS crackdown on progressive philanthropy and activists are now rampant on the left. And yet, Rep. Crow reintroduced the “End Dark Money Act” earlier this year.

One zombie proposal that hasn’t reared its ugly head yet this Congress is the DISCLOSE Act. In 2024, Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer pledged that the bill would be a top priority for Democrats if Kamala Harris won the White House. That didn’t happen, so the DISCLOSE Act, which would force nonprofit advocacy groups to publicly expose the names and addresses of their major donors, has stayed on the shelf for now. It represents yet another tool Trump could use to chill progressive organizing and advocacy. It also raises significant safety concerns in an era of rising political violence.

Maybe the DISCLOSE Act’s absence is a sign Democratic leaders are starting to wise up. Or maybe they are just waiting for the right moment to conjure it from the grave. Or maybe, it’s… it’s right behind you!

Got you. You know, it’s Halloween. I guess everyone’s entitled to one good scare.

Politicians are notoriously slow to adapt to cultural and technological changes, and sometimes even political trends. Let’s hope they are fast enough to stay a step ahead of these zombie proposals. Otherwise, it’s our freedom and privacy that will pay the price.