Litigation

U.S. Disclosure Bill Exceptions: Pro and Con

By Peter Hardin

Exemptions carved out for some groups in a campaign-spending disclosure bill recently passed by the House of Representatives are unfair and must be fixed, a major national newspaper says.

A USA Today editorial protests that the DISCLOSE Act was changed so drastically that it turned into the “Disclose-by-some Act:”

“First, sponsors exempted the NRA along with a few other huge groups, such as the AARP. After some liberal groups whined, the bill was rewritten again to exempt the Sierra Club, an environmental powerhouse, before it passed the House.

“What a travesty. Not only are some advocacy groups treated differently from others, the exemptions might make the measure, if it becomes law, more vulnerable to expected legal challenges.”

The editorial calls on senators to close the “loopholes” and “put a spotlight on all spending for campaign ads.” The bill was drafted in response to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, removing key constraints on political spending by corporations and labor unions.

In a commentary published by the newspaper, Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md. and an author of the legislation, defended it and said “limited adjustments” were made to get it passed:

“To pass the bill, limited adjustments were made for large, citizen-based organizations, such as AARP, the NRA and the Sierra Club. Whether you love or hate them, such groups are known to voters and are not trying to conceal their identities. Even so, the bill subjects them to more disclosure than is now required. Their CEOs will have to “stand by their ads,” and they cannot use corporate contributions for political expenditures.”

To learn more about the controversial legislation, check out Gavel Grab.

Full post as published by The Gavel on July 06, 2010 (boomark / email).