In recent years, few Supreme Court decisions have been as controversial – or as consequential – as the ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission in 2010, in which the 5-4 majority held that the First Amendment rights of organizations such as corporations, labor unions, and other associations were violated by provisions of the McCain-Feingold Act from 2002 which regulated their political spending and activities.

Voters have watched two more debates from the major parties and countless promises of what would make America great or how the individual candidate would tackle the problems facing America. In the final analysis, none of these promises really matter, as neither side's platform from the executive side could ever make it through such a sharply divided Congress as we have today.

Sure, the Republicans face as tough (possibly tougher) congressional map as the Democrats faced in 2014, but neither side is going to gain the all powerful ability to control Senate cloture.

I love Bernie Sanders, and I recognize the need for universal single payer health care. I love that Bernie is still pushing for it, because “Obamacare” is far too expensive. It does not reduce the costs of our health care system, and it does not achieve the goal of universal coverage, but we cannot go backward. We must move forward.

Unfortunately, Bernie’s plan has several flaws. The flaws are no doubt a result of the way our partisan government operates, but they should be highlighted nonetheless.

On September 22, 1862, Abraham Lincoln announced his intention to order the emancipation of all slaves in the states that did not end their rebellion by January 1, 1863.

So on January 1, 1863, President Lincoln issued the famous and historical presidential proclamation and executive order known as the Emancipation Proclamation and intended to free those slaves.

That alone did not free the slaves in areas still under rebellion. However, as more Confederate regions were controlled by the Union army, more slaves were emancipated with the help of the Proclamation.

The Washington Post reported Thursday that the co-chairs of the Commission on Presidential Debates claim they are open to including an independent or third-party candidate in the general election debates. This is true, but only if the third candidate clears a near-impossible hurdle or a major movement emerges that pressures the commission to change the rules regarding candidate inclusion.

CPD co-chairs, Frank Fahrenkopf Jr. and Michael McCurry, will appear on the PBS public affairs show, The Open Mind, on January 24 to discuss the issue.

NEW YORK, Jan. 15, 2016 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ -- In response to Marco Rubio's recent campaign event in New Hampshire where the candidate appears to have made a climate change of heart and has called for America to be "number one in wind, and number one in solar, and number one in biofuels, and number one in renewables, number one in energy efficiency. Let's lead in all of these things," independent presidential candidate Ken Fields responded by saying: