The Disclosure Act, The ACLU Has Got It Right
The DISCLOSE Act, slightly modified, is headed for a cloture vote on Tuesday afternoon. The alterations to the bill have changed few minds outside of Congress. It remains to be seen whether the modification in the bill — the sponsor removed a passage allowing labor unions to transfer funds among its affiliates — will be enough to attract enough support to achieve cloture.
I’d suggest you write to your Federal Representative or Senate, but we live in Connecticut, they don’t listen to us. And why should they? They are virtually guaranteed a re-election year after year. Little to no repercussions for voting against the will of the people.
The DISCLOSE Act (full name, Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act) was passed through the House by a 219 to 206 vote with only two Republicans voting in favor and 36 Democrats voting against. The two Republicans that voted in favor were Mike Castle of Delaware and Joseph Cao of Louisiana.
So what is this law supposed to do? For one thing the law would require “special interest group officials to physically appear at the end of campaign ads they sponsor, acknowledging their campaign contributions.” It would also require that advocacy groups detail on their public websites every campaign they’ve donated to.
But, as it turns out, Democrats excluded some of the biggest spenders on political ads and campaigns in the country, most of them their patrons. In a manager’s amendment the Democrats excluded any organization that has over 1 million members. That leaves Big Labor free and clear of these new disclosure rules. It also leaves the National Rifle Association free of the new requirements.
The American Civil Liberties Union is sending around a letter of opposition that states “we believe this legislation would fail to improve the integrity of our campaigns in any substantial way while significantly harming the speech and associational rights of Americans.”
The ACLU has four objections to the altered bill:
- The DISCLOSE Act fails to preserve the anonymity of small donors, thereby especially chilling the expression rights of those who support controversial causes.
- The DISCLOSE Act would chill not only express advocacy on political candidates, but also issue advocacy.
- The DISCLOSE Act imposes impractical requirements on those who wish to communicate using broadcast messages.
- The DISCLOSE Act imposes unjust restrictions on contractors, TARP participants and corporations with minimal foreign participation.
