House Passes DISCLOSE Act - With Exemptions

CBS/iStockPhoto

Updated 5:49 p.m. Eastern Time

The House has passes the campaign finance reform bill known as the DISCLOSE Act by a vote of 219 to 206.

217 Democrats and two Republicans voted for the measure.

The DISCLOSE Act, or the Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act, would require corporations to disclose top five donors in their political ads and the head of the company would be required to appear at the end of the ad.

But the bill exempts the NRA, AARP and the Humane Society from the requirements. It exempts 401C4 organizations with over 500,000 members.

The bill is a response to the Supreme Court's Citizen's United ruling in January that lifted requirements and limits on corporate or union-funded political advertising.

The bill still needs to pass the Senate. While Senate Democratic leaders say this is a priority, it is difficult to see how they can fit it into their packed schedule.

"The Democratic majority in the House jammed through a piece of legislation that clearly violates the Constitution, as well as basic principles of fairness and equity," U.S. Chamber of Commerce President and CEO Thomas J. Donohue said in a statement. Donohue's powerful business lobby would be subject to the disclosure rules under the legislation.

Said Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence: "This bill exempting the NRA, and only a handful of other wealthy groups, from having to follow the same rules as other advocacy groups involved in political campaigns is fundamentally flawed, likely can't survive judicial scrutiny, and should be rejected by the United States Senate as currently written."

President Obama weighed in with a supportive statement.

"I congratulate the House of Representatives on today's passage of the DISCLOSE Act, a critical piece of legislation to control the flood of special interest money into our elections. The DISCLOSE Act would establish the strongest-ever disclosure requirements for election-related spending by special interests, including Wall Street and big oil companies, and it would restrict spending by foreign-controlled corporations. It would give the American public the right to see exactly who is spending money in an attempt to influence campaigns for public office. The House bill is not perfect - I would have preferred that it include no exemptions. But it mandates unprecedented transparency in campaign spending, and it ensures that corporations who spend money on American elections are accountable first and foremost to the American people. I urge the Senate to act swiftly on its version of the bill, and I look forward to working with both chambers on prompt enactment of final legislation."

[billlaubscher]

THE MODERN COLLECTIVISTS AND THE DEMISE OF THE REPUBLIC

There are modern day Tea Parties and a growing and intense attitude of discontent that frightens my sensibilities. The Obama expendable foot soldiers of Pelosi, Dodd, Frank and Reed will be cast aside as public greed martyrs in his quest for a new world order. Free speech, the right to faith, the right to bear arms, the right of public assembly will all be marginalized. The latest attack via The Disclose Act is proof. Our monetary system is nearing extinction being replaced by a global currency and our legal system is approaching a transnational legal process. The right to pass wealth to our children is being attacked with the coming net worth tax. The United States, in terms of a culture, will become a one hit wonder. What has taken centuries to build will be destroyed in less than two years.

Bill Laubscher
"Notes from a Common Man" blog

[NBCMichael]

Corporate media are corporations!

The "mainstream media" has carefully concealed the fact that the speech and press "Rights" enumerated for "We The People" have been transferred to them!

Does anyone actually believe that newspaper or broadcast stations would have spilled ink and used the airways promoting election reforms that were "designed to restrict freedom of "speech and the press" if they had not first met in smoke filled rooms with lawmakers and worked out the details of legislation that would exempt them from those restrictions? If this sounds like the kind of special interest corruption that election laws were suppose to prevent.... IT IS!

Americans no longer enjoy the same "First Amendment Rights" that every generation of Americans prior to 1975 had! Prior to 1975 every U.S. Citizen, political party and political organization enjoyed the same "Free Press Rights" as the Courier Journal or the New York Times. Prior to 1975 U.S. Citizens were not required to register with the Federal Election Commission before publishing their political opinions and the Republican and Democratic parties were allowed to endorse their candidates in newspapers owned and operated by their political parties.

2 USC 431 (9) (B) The term "expenditure" does not include -

(i) any news story, commentary, or editorial distributed

through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper,

magazine, or other periodical publication, unless such facilities

are owned or controlled by any political party, political

committee, or candidate;

[NBCMichael]

HR 5175 would unlawfully regulate and establish onerous reporting requirements for groups of like minded citizens using non-profit corporations to combine their money and coordinate efforts to get a grass roots message before the public.



Joining with like minded citizens to assemble and communicate our concerns to other voters and petitioning candidates, elected politicians and government for a redress of grievances define the essence of campaigns.



And the 1st Amendment prohibits Congress from making any law infringing on the freedom of speech, the press, the right to peaceably assemble or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances. It denies Congress the authority to write election laws!



The 1st Amendment was included in the Bill of Rights because the Constitutions of the original 13 colonies already included protections of fundamental freedoms like speech, press and assembly and the delegates were afraid of the potential power of an over reaching federal government. The 1st Amendment guarantees citizens rights to freedom of speech, press and assembly under their State Constitutions by denying the U.S. Congress the authority to write laws infringing on same!



In fact there are no federal elections only elections for federal office held in the States. Regulating elections is the prerogative of the States and not an enumerated power of the federal government.



Allowing federal politicians to write laws regulating how they are elected does not level the playing field for new candidates or political parties. Since F.E.C.A was passed in 1971, incumbents have been reelected 95-98%, a higher rate than politburo members were reelected during the cold war. And corruption has gotten worse since the passage of FECA and BCRA.



Prior to the revolution, the King of England wanted the platen of every printing press in the colonies to have a unique mark to identify every page printed so he could track the source of dissent. Anonymous speech is an American birth right! If enforced, laws like HR 5175 would have prevented the pamphlet Common Sense from being published and American might never have over thrown the British



Coordination is the act of making different people or things work together for a goal or effect. In all walks of life coordination is considered a virtue, desirable, sought after. Coordination equates with grace and efficiency. Can you imagine telling members of a sports team it is against the rules to coordinate their efforts to win? Can you imagine a regulation that restricted employees of a corporation from coordinating their efforts to mount a successful ad campaign or provide excellent customer service? But federal campaign laws attempt to make coordination a crime!



The corporate media exemption is a perfect example of how federal campaign laws have corrupted the process in favor of special interests.



Corporations did not have rights under the Constitution until a Supreme Court clerk added a footnote to the Santa Clara County v. Southern Pacific Railroad Company decision, 99 years after the Constitution was ratified. Freedom of the press was originally the right of flesh and blood citizens and equal protection under the law is a fundamental concept. But the Federal Election Campaign Act exempted for profit media corporations from regulations and reporting requirements that restricted the rights of grass roots organizations to print and speak. FECA and BCRA have created regulated and unregulated classes crowing a ?Royal? corporate press that drowns the voice of citizens who want change.



Is it any wonder that federal incumbents and corporate media are the biggest supporters of new and stricter campaign laws that insure reelection n for the former and monopoly for the latter?

But if a politician must pay newspapers and broadcasters to carry his ads, how can positive or negative editorials by those same media outlets not have value? And corporate media are dependent on the advertising dollars of the same special interests campaign laws claim they want to protect the electorate from.

In the words of E.W. Scripps: ?A newspaper must at all times antagonize the selfish interests of that very class which furnishes the larger part of a newspaper's income... The press in this country is dominated by the wealthy few...that it cannot be depended upon to give the great mass of the people that correct information concerning political, economical and social subjects which it is necessary that the mass of people Shall have in order that they vote...in the best way to protect themselves from the brutal force and chicanery of the ruling and employing classes.?

[user000049586849302948602]

Why does it exempt the NRA, AARP and the Humane Society?

[jfielder1178]

The main purpose of this bill is not to protect the public the main purpose is to try to control the Tidal Wave of Anger and Money that is going to be comming this year to wipe out the current incapable goverment in the November Elections.

If you read the details of the bill much is designed to try to put a Muzzle on the many Tea Party groups that have poped up in the last two years.

There are clauses that mention a group needs to have over 500,000 members and have been around at least 10 years to be exempt from the regulations.

The Legislators already know that this will be struck down by the Supreme Court. But they realize that it will not be stuck down until after the Nov elections.

This is Government at its WORST a goverment super majority using their power to roadblock freedom of speach for the Tea Party while the Country BURNS with unsolved problems....

AND worst of all the still are blaming Bush and the Republicans for all the problems....These are not leaders.

Dear CONGRESS please do your job and solve our problems... then you won't have to worry about what people are going to say about you during election season.

[LOL_AT_CBS]

variablespanner
Where exactly is congress authorized to require you to do ANYTHING in order to speak freely?
And yes, a lack of anonymity does diminish free speech.

[stn_sage]

A better name for this would be: WE DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'RE DOING (WDWWD)Act!
Because in truth, these poor 'tards do NOT appear to!

The funniest part of the story is the line that says the Senate doesn't have time to deal with it, due to their packed schedule! What a joke! LMAO!

Doing what?! Stalling? Putting everything useful, off? Because that's all they ever do! What a crock!

[dem959]

The passage of this bill signifies saying yes to change, rather than taking the usual Republican route of saying no! :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3sxmBbE8hc&feature=player_embedded

[retm-w]

So it's OK to let the NRA and AARP off the hook to do whatever they want. They are probably the two biggest abusers of the system.