Posted on 07/27/2010 2:29:03 PM PDT by jazusamo
Senate Republicans launched a successful filibuster Tuesday to uphold the Supreme Court's decision earlier this year that let corporations and unions spend freely on campaign ads.
Democrats had sought to undo much of the ruling by adding strict disclosure requirements for those who run ads, and banning any ads from companies that have federal contracts. They argued the court's ruling would amount to letting corporations buy elections.
But they fell shy of the 60 needed to overcome a filibuster and begin debating the bill.
"This bill is a partisan effort, pure and simple, drafted behind closed doors by current and former Democrat campaign committee leaders, and it's aimed at one thing and one thing only: this bill is about protecting incumbent Democrats from criticism ahead of November," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Kentucky Republican.
Democrats said they are indeed worried about Republicans — and in particular Karl Rove, the former political strategist for President George W. Bush — spending millions of dollars on ads to influence elections this year.
Sen. Charles E. Schumer, New York Democrat and a former chief of Senate Democrats' campaign arm, led the push for the bill and said it's not about denying corporations, unions and other organizations the right to run ads, it's about making them disclose who is funding them.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Finally they did somethng.
The right idea would be to eliminate contributions ABOVE THE $2500 that INDIVIDUALS are allowed, and apply it to Unions, Corporations, 501's, etc.
LET everyone who wants to have "free speech rights" to donate have the same limit on their donation total...whether they are an individual, or a specific group/corporation.
This SURE would upset those who spend millions to get special laws passed to hand them profits or bailout funds....
I’m shocked, just shocked! The Democrats wanted to change things to make it easier to defeat Republicans, and they expected a Republican or two to cooperate. What is this world coming to now? Next thing we know, Lucy will actually let Charlie Brown kick the football.
Yes it would and it's an excellent point. Those special laws cost taxpayers a bunch either directly or indirectly.
LOL! That's exactly what she keeps telling him. :)
There was more to it than just what you see at face value.
IIRC it had a stipulation that some types of groups that were banned from advertising could advertise if they have been in existence for some period of time, essentially blocking out any of the recent conservative or Tea Party organizations and allowing unions, left wing political groups that have been around over some number of years. That number probably resembles the number of years it has been since GWB won the first time and all the Left wing nuts formed groups.
But I could be wrong and have wasted not only my time but thousands of other peoples’ time that just read this.
Ma Bad.
Only because it has an effect on their reelection. They refuse to do it on matters that have great weight on Americans
Amazing isn’t it?
Don’t think corporations should have the right to donate. Nor unions or any group.
They don’t vote. The people do.
Charles E. Schumer is more like Wile E. Coyote with his Acme Incumbent Protection bills.
Yes, they finally did something because Disclose threatened their strolls to easy reelection. They let HC “Reform” through because as members of the ruling class, they’re mostly exempt from its effects. They let Financial Reform through for the same reason — but may have undone themselves! How long will it be before our Pres__ent stretches Financial Reform to declare the federal Congress dysfunctional and close it down?
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.