GOP trying to stop new Disclose Law overturning Citizens United ruling

This is a good example of right wing propaganda.  The Citizens United ruling by the Supreme Court allows corporations to spend as much as they want on political campaigns. It declared most of the bipartisan McCain-Feingold Act to be unconstitutional.

Americans of both parties overwhelmingly oppose this Citizens United ruling that allows and most favor new limits on such spending, according to a new Washington according to the Post-ABC News poll. In summary:

• Poll: Large majority opposes Supreme Court's decision on campaign financing
• Behind the Numbers: Campaign finance ruling sparks bipartisan agreement
• Data: Washington Post-ABC news poll

Eight in 10 poll respondents say they oppose the high court's Jan. 21 decision to allow unfettered corporate political spending, with 65 percent "strongly" opposed. Nearly as many backed congressional action to curb the ruling, with 72 percent in favor of reinstating limits. 

The poll reveals relatively little difference of opinion on the issue among Democrats (85 percent opposed to the ruling), Republicans (76 percent) and independents (81 percent). 

Here is the right wing NewsMax spin on the new Disclose law. We edited the Newsmax email for brevity: 

I am writing to ask you to take two minutes today to e-mail your Senators to keep Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats from stealing the House and Senate elections in November.

The Democrats are trying to steal the November elections with a new unconstitutional bill. They've already passed it in the House of Representatives—only the Senate remains.

We must act today because the Senate could vote tomorrow. Please click here to protect the November elections. The DISCLOSE Act is designed to make it much harder for conservative, free market, and Tea Party Groups to get involved in the elections.

It would violate the free speech rights of non-profit groups by requiring burdensome new disclosure and reporting requirements of all campaign activities.

Big, wealthy groups may be able to fill out all the new forms required without too much trouble. But smaller groups (such as Freedom Action and local Tea Party groups) may be stopped altogether from making their voices heard in the elections. DISCLOSE is supposed to stand for “Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections.”

But a more honest title would be “Democratic Incumbents Seeking to Contain Losses by Outlawing Speech in Elections.”

That’s according to Bradley Smith, a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission! The Democrats in Congress don’t even try to hide the fact that it is designed to help elect them and defeat Republicans . . . 
 
The DISCLOSE Act would overturn key parts of the Supreme Court’s pro free-speech decision in Citizens United v. the Federal Election Commission.
 
The Democrats know that the Supreme Court will eventually find that the DISCLOSE Act is also unconstitutional but not until well after the 2010 Congressional elections. Incredibly, the DISCLOSE Act is written to exempt Labor Unions and big non- profit groups such as the National Rifle Association!

In return for being exempted from all the new reporting requirements, the NRA dropped its opposition. Without the NRA sellout, the DISCLOSE Act would have been defeated in the House. The Wall Street Journal on June 16th explained how Speaker Nancy Pelosi made a deal with the NRA in order to pass the DISCLOSE Act:

This backroom deal came at the behest of Democrats from conservative states, for whom the NRA's scorecard of their legislative record can be a major boost or obstacle to election. Creating a special exception for the NRA, and thereby assuring the Democrats "good grades" on Second Amendment rights, eases the way for the bill to be passed. A failing grade on First Amendment rights is somebody else's problem.

The Wall Street Journal highlighted Freedom Action’s work in exposing this backroom deal: “Myron Ebell, president of Freedom Action, a grass-roots small-government group, blasted the NRA's move as a "sellout." The Washington Post on June 16th went into more detail:

The most visible critic of the deal is Myron Ebell, director of Freedom Action and a fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, who is encouraging conservatives to slam Congress with calls and e-mails. He is pointedly attacking the NRA for the carve-out.

"The House appears to have scheduled a vote for tomorrow," he said. "They have the votes, and before the NRA sell-out, they did not have the votes. Look, it's one thing when a ship is sinking and you want to save your group. But the ship was not sinking until they did this."

Even Cleta Mitchell, a board member of the NRA and a campaign finance law attorney, has declared that the true purpose of the perversely named DISCLOSE Act is to “silence congressional critics in the 2010 elections”!

Yada, yada, yada

Thanks for all you do to keep America strong!

Yours for freedom,
Myron Ebell
President
Freedom Action
1899 L Street, NW
Suite 1250
Washington, DC 20036
202.331.2777

The Disclose Act will, in fact, reign in corporate campaign spending and make the next election more democratic (no pun intended). The Supreme Court ruling on Citizens United strengthened corporatism in the US.corporatism is another word for fascism.

You can be sure that the GOP minority in the Senate will try to filibuster the new law because Republicans are dependent on corporations for their survival.

We had to laugh when Newsmax suggested the Disclose Act would help big wealthy groups and then it attacked the NRA. It's a brave new world, isn't it?

source: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/17/AR2010021701151.html

Subscribe to the Rightardia feed: feeds.feedburner.com/blogspot/IGiu

Netcraft rank: 14896  

http://toolbar.netcraft.com/site_report?url=http://rightardia.blogspot.com