Republicans Block Campaign Finance Bill
Senate Republicans blocked legislation imposing new restrictions on political activity by special interest groups Tuesday, likely dealing a fatal blow to a drive by the White House and congressional Democrats to rewrite campaign rules in the run-up to the midterm elections.
The 57-41 vote was three short of the total needed to advance the measure, which calls for greater disclosure on campaign advertising funded independently by corporations, unions and other organizations, but included an exemption for the National Rifle Association and a small number of other groups.
Less than 100 days before the elections, the debate was highly political - and the outcome widely anticipated.
Anticipating defeat, Democrats swiftly unleashed a coordinated attack employing one of their emerging campaign themes. "After a year of defending big banks, big insurance, big oil and other special interests, Republicans might want to drown out the voices of Americans who don't have the financial resources of big corporations but want to have their say in this year's elections," the party's chairman, Tim Kaine, said in a statement.
Republicans, anticipating big gains in the fall, folded the day's Senate events into their own election-year argument - that Democrats have been unsuccessful in easing double-digit unemployment.
"Today was a rebuke to congressional Democrats who need to put aside their electoral self-interest and start addressing our struggling economy, which continues to be the primary concern among American voters," GOP Chairman Michael Steele said.
Democrats drafted the bill in response to a Supreme Court ruling last winter that said corporations and unions were free to spend their own money on advertising, mass mailings and other forms of political activity. A companion measure cleared the House last month on a near party-line vote over vociferous Republican protests.
Under both bills, nearly all organizations airing political ads independently of candidates or the political parties would be required to disclose their top donors and the amounts they paid. The group's CEO or other top official would be required to appear on screen taking responsibility for the commercial.
Additionally, any business, union or other entity holding a government contract worth more than $10 million would be banned from a variety of political activity, as would firms in possession of federal bailout funds and corporations in which foreigners own more than a majority of voting shares.
Corporations, labor unions and others engaging in certain types of independent political activity would be required to report donations, dues or other contributions from all donors who have given $600 or more.
Whatever the partisanship involved, the legislation was a case study in the power of special interests.
The NRA exemption originally was added in the House after Democrats concluded it was essential if moderate and conservative members of the rank and file were to vote for the legislation. The loophole was then broadened as the leadership sought to quell criticism that it was bowing to a group that had been instrumental in blocking gun control bills long sought by liberals.
In the end, the NRA was officially neutral, angering Republicans who didn't want Democrats to have any political help in advancing the legislation.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO both opposed the bill, a rare agreement of two arch-foes. Organized labor had been neutral when the bill passed the House, but switched its position after changes were made to tighten reporting requirements for transfers of dues money from local unions and their national headquarters.
The American Civil Liberties Union also was against the bill, arguing it was a violation of First Amendment rights.
The constitutional debate was overshadowed by the approach of elections, though.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the bill's chief sponsor, said it was intended to crack down on shadowy campaign groups that spend heavily on attack ads. Referring to Republicans, he said, "There are visions, visions in people's heads of Karl Rove spending $50 million funded by people we don't know to attack candidates for reasons we're not sure of and never putting their name to it."
Republicans were unpersuaded.
"This bill is a partisan effort, pure and simple, drafted behind closed doors by current and former Democrat campaign committee leaders," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, the GOP Senate leader. "And it's aimed at one thing and one thing only: this bill is about protecting incumbent Democrats from criticism ahead of November."
Schumer was chairman of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, which is responsible for maximizing the party's chances in Senate races, before stepping aside after the 2008 elections.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., the sponsor of the House-passed measure, is chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
In a statement, he said that "Senate Republicans once again voted to protect powerful special interests instead of Americans - this time voting for what amounts to a corporate takeover of our elections."
"Despite widespread Republican support for increased transparency and disclosure in the past, their opposition to the DISCLOSE Act ensures that voters will be left in the dark as unlimited corporate money is spent by shadowy groups seeking to mislead Americans," he said.
The votes broke down strictly along party lines, although Reid switched to the opposition at the end of the roll call so he could seek a second test vote in the future. Sens. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and John Ensign, R-Nev., were absent.
© 2010 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. The 57-41 vote was three short of the total needed to advance the measure, which calls for greater disclosure on campaign advertising funded independently by corporations, unions and other organizations, but included an exemption for the National Rifle Association and a small number of other groups.
Less than 100 days before the elections, the debate was highly political - and the outcome widely anticipated.
Anticipating defeat, Democrats swiftly unleashed a coordinated attack employing one of their emerging campaign themes. "After a year of defending big banks, big insurance, big oil and other special interests, Republicans might want to drown out the voices of Americans who don't have the financial resources of big corporations but want to have their say in this year's elections," the party's chairman, Tim Kaine, said in a statement.
Republicans, anticipating big gains in the fall, folded the day's Senate events into their own election-year argument - that Democrats have been unsuccessful in easing double-digit unemployment.
"Today was a rebuke to congressional Democrats who need to put aside their electoral self-interest and start addressing our struggling economy, which continues to be the primary concern among American voters," GOP Chairman Michael Steele said.
Democrats drafted the bill in response to a Supreme Court ruling last winter that said corporations and unions were free to spend their own money on advertising, mass mailings and other forms of political activity. A companion measure cleared the House last month on a near party-line vote over vociferous Republican protests.
Under both bills, nearly all organizations airing political ads independently of candidates or the political parties would be required to disclose their top donors and the amounts they paid. The group's CEO or other top official would be required to appear on screen taking responsibility for the commercial.
Additionally, any business, union or other entity holding a government contract worth more than $10 million would be banned from a variety of political activity, as would firms in possession of federal bailout funds and corporations in which foreigners own more than a majority of voting shares.
Corporations, labor unions and others engaging in certain types of independent political activity would be required to report donations, dues or other contributions from all donors who have given $600 or more.
Whatever the partisanship involved, the legislation was a case study in the power of special interests.
The NRA exemption originally was added in the House after Democrats concluded it was essential if moderate and conservative members of the rank and file were to vote for the legislation. The loophole was then broadened as the leadership sought to quell criticism that it was bowing to a group that had been instrumental in blocking gun control bills long sought by liberals.
In the end, the NRA was officially neutral, angering Republicans who didn't want Democrats to have any political help in advancing the legislation.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce and AFL-CIO both opposed the bill, a rare agreement of two arch-foes. Organized labor had been neutral when the bill passed the House, but switched its position after changes were made to tighten reporting requirements for transfers of dues money from local unions and their national headquarters.
The American Civil Liberties Union also was against the bill, arguing it was a violation of First Amendment rights.
The constitutional debate was overshadowed by the approach of elections, though.
Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the bill's chief sponsor, said it was intended to crack down on shadowy campaign groups that spend heavily on attack ads. Referring to Republicans, he said, "There are visions, visions in people's heads of Karl Rove spending $50 million funded by people we don't know to attack candidates for reasons we're not sure of and never putting their name to it."
Republicans were unpersuaded.
"This bill is a partisan effort, pure and simple, drafted behind closed doors by current and former Democrat campaign committee leaders," said Sen. Mitch McConnell, the GOP Senate leader. "And it's aimed at one thing and one thing only: this bill is about protecting incumbent Democrats from criticism ahead of November."
Schumer was chairman of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee, which is responsible for maximizing the party's chances in Senate races, before stepping aside after the 2008 elections.
Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md., the sponsor of the House-passed measure, is chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
In a statement, he said that "Senate Republicans once again voted to protect powerful special interests instead of Americans - this time voting for what amounts to a corporate takeover of our elections."
"Despite widespread Republican support for increased transparency and disclosure in the past, their opposition to the DISCLOSE Act ensures that voters will be left in the dark as unlimited corporate money is spent by shadowy groups seeking to mislead Americans," he said.
The votes broke down strictly along party lines, although Reid switched to the opposition at the end of the roll call so he could seek a second test vote in the future. Sens. Joseph Lieberman, I-Conn., and John Ensign, R-Nev., were absent.
Popular in Politics
- Romney condemns "breach of trust" in Washington 177 Comments
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 351 Comments
- IRS targeting overlooked biggest soft money groups 66 Comments
- For GOP, scandals could be an electoral plus - or minus 327 Comments
- Republicans use IRS scandal to tar Obamacare 40 Comments
- Ousted IRS chief: "I did not mislead" the American people
- Why Obama should worry that current scandals might impact 2016
- Immigration deal reached in House
That almost never happens. Except when the Senate sits on days ending in 'y'.
If liberals lie, then what do you call:
George Bush lying to go to war with Iraq.
Ronald Reagan lying about Iran/Contra.
Richard Nixon lying about pretty much everything.
Were they all secretly liberals?
After removing many of our ridiculous Representatives and Senators from office, I want to see the following:
1) Significantly reduce the federal government to a manageable size and scope.
a) Repeal the health care bill and all of its associated expenses, taxes, and fees.
b) Reduce the size and scope of the IRS by replacing our currently form of income tax with the Fair Tax or a national sales tax.
c) Education in the US is run by the states, and the federal Department of Education educates no one. Eliminate this entire unnecessary federal Department.
d) Get the government out of running or competing with American private businesses (GM, AIG, Chrysler, Freddy Mac, Fannie Mae, NPR and PBS). Businesses should make it on their own.
e) Stop the built in automatic increases of funding for federal programs. Each program should be required to justify need for annual increase in funding.
2) Secure US borders, and enforce immigration laws.
3) With serious reductions to the size and scope of the federal government, we should be able to reduce the tax burden on all businesses and all individual taxpayers.
4) Open up ANWAR to drilling for oil.
5) Since leadership in Washington has proved it is incapable of handling the public?s money, we should pass a Balanced Budget Amendment to the US Constitution.
6) We should do away with the seniority system used by Washington politicians, and pass and Amendment to the US Constitution imposing term limits on the House (3 two year terms) and the Senate (2 six year terms). No politician should retire on the taxpayer?s dime.
7) After establishing an environment where private business can begin hiring, the federal government should focus on reducing the national debt.
8) Address the mismanagement of Social Security and Medicare, so that none of the money for those programs can be spent otherwise.
9) Make sure the recipients of bailout money repay the American taxpayer, or have they liquidate their assets for repayment (GM, AIG, Chrysler, Freddy Mac, and Fannie Mae). No company is too big to fail. We have monopoly laws.
10) Stop allowing the federal government to micromanage state and local issues. Make sure the federal government is limited to declared Constitutional duties, and reserve the rights of states and local communities to handle all other responsibilities.
In summary: We are in dangerous economic times. Federal spending should focus on defending the nation and creating an environment where American private businesses can be successful. No bills, like cap and trade, should be passed which cripple American business. Also, this is no time to experiment with unproven or extremist ideologies.
.
.
It costs as enormous amount of money to fund a campaign and as such it makes all candidates take money from lobbyists and special-interests. This has corrupted our system.
The only answer is to get all the corporations, unions, special-interests out of our election process. This means passing a law to undo Citizens United, the worst Supreme Court decision in our history. And it means that we need to have 100% publicly funded campaign financing. This is only way that we are going to purify our democracy.
.