Posted on 07/27/2010 10:54:55 AM PDT by jazusamo
Complete title: President Obama Once Again Makes Erroneous Claim That Foreign Entities Can Spend Unlimited Amounts in U.S. Elections
Washington (CNSNews.com) – President Barack Obama on Monday incorrectly stated that a landmark campaign-finance ruling allows foreign entities to pour money into U.S. elections. It’s the second time he’s made such a claim, and this time it happened while he was promoting the Democrats’ DISCLOSE Act in a Rose Garden speech.
The Senate on Tuesday is taking up the legislation that would put strict new requirements on campaign advertising. The House already has passed a similar version of the bill.
“Tomorrow there’s going to be a very important vote in the Senate about how much influence special interests should have over our democracy,” Obama said. “Because of the Supreme Court’s decision earlier this year in the Citizens United case, big corporations -- even foreign-controlled ones -- are now allowed to spend unlimited amounts of money on American elections.”
Obama made a similar claim in his State of the Union Address, prompting Justice Samuel Alito to mouth the words “not true.” The majority opinion itself and liberal commentators attested that Alito was correct. (See earlier story)
Under the DISCLOSE Act, the Federal Elections Commission would require the CEOs of companies that run political advertisements to appear in the ad to say that he or she “approves this message.” The top funder of the political ad also would be required to appear in the commercial.
Critics say the DISCLOSE Act, with its "onerous" requirements, is intended to suppress the free speech of organizations before the mid-term election.
The bill also says that government contractors and companies that received bailout money from the $700-billion Troubled Assets Relief Program would be banned altogether from campaign advertising.
The legislation also would bar a company with more than 20 percent foreign ownership from advertising, even if that company employs thousands of U.S. citizens.
“The DISCLOSE Act would simply require corporate political advertisers to reveal who’s funding their activities,” Obama said. “So when special interests take to the airwaves, whoever is running and funding the ad would have to appear in the advertisement and claim responsibility for it -- like a company’s CEO or the organization’s biggest contributor. And foreign-controlled corporations and entities would be restricted from spending money to influence American elections -- just as they were in the past.”
The Supreme Court’s 5-4 ruling in Citizens United vs. the FEC lifted restrictions on companies, unions, and other organizations, allowing them to make independent expenditures in political campaigns.
That ruling, however, did not allow corporations to contribute directly to a campaign or to coordinate expenditures with a campaign. Nor did the ruling lift existing law that blocks foreign contributions to political campaigns.
Under the FEC regulation 11 CFR 110.20(i): “A foreign national shall not direct, dictate, control, or directly or indirectly participate in the decision-making process of any person, such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization with regard to such person's Federal or non-Federal election-related activities, such as decisions concerning the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with elections for any Federal, State, or local office or decisions concerning the administration of a political committee.”
Further, federal law, under 2 USC 441-Sec. 441e, also prohibits foreign donations to political campaigns.
In the majority opinion in the Citizens United case, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote, “We need not reach the question whether the Government has a compelling interest in preventing foreign individuals or associations from influencing our Nation's political process.”
Shortly after the State of the Union Address, Adam Winkler, a law professor at University of California-Los Angeles, partly took Alito’s side. Winkler’s piece, posted on the liberal Huffington Post blog, was entitled, “Alito was rude (but right).” According to Winkler, “The president was wrong about the Supreme Court decision.”
Well... they did for his campaign.
Disney should really consider imaging Pinocchio as idiot-ridden Jack Squat Barry.......
maybe he is speaking from experience regarding the source of campaign financial support from his own as-yet undetermined handlers
affirmative action in action as they say
From what I can tell he partied his way through college as an affirmative action recipient.
Yep, not much doubt about that.
This claim of Stroker’s is not erroneous.
He knows full well that he is lying about this. Then again, he lies about everything.
He would know.
Obama Turns Blind Eye to Credit Card Donation Fraud
http://www.newsmax.com/headlines/obama_illegal_donations/2008/10/21/142761.html
“OBAMA’S FOREIGN DONORS: THE MEDIA AVERTS ITS EYES”
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/obamas_donor_contributions_sil.html
“Fictitious Donors Found in Obama Finance Records”
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/10/us/politics/10donate.html?ref=politics
Barry Bamboozler.
bttt
Have we forgotten???
What about the use of multiple store-bought credit cards to exceed the limits? Or entry of phoney names? Obama used this for millions of $$ in 2008. The Obama campaign intentionally turned off their tracking system so violations could not be proven.
Breaking News: Chavez lies.
Breaking News: Stalin lied.
Breaking News: Hitler lied.
Foreign entities poured huge amounts into obama’s campaign in 2008 when they turned off the forms that told where the donations came from.
What O’s concerned about is the republicans might also tap into foreign money.
Its the genious of democrats to look at their sin and impute that to republicans
it's just like leftards and their thousands of gun control laws: "The philosophy of gun control: Teenagers are roaring through town at 90 MPH, where the speed limit is 25. Your solution is to lower the speed limit to 20."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.