Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

House Passes DISCLOSE Act
NRO ^ | Daniel Foster

Posted on 06/24/2010 1:46:50 PM PDT by OldDeckHand

The House just passed the DISCLOSE Act, by a vote of 219-206. As with so much in this Congress, the only thing bipartisan about the bill was the opposition to it.

(Excerpt) Read more at corner.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Front Page News; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: bhotyranny; campaign; disclose; discloseact; elections; finance; freespeech; liberalfascism; lping; obama; palin; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
That was fast - WAY too fast. Not good.
1 posted on 06/24/2010 1:46:53 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Another Pelosi example of “We’ll tell you what is in it after we pass it”?????


2 posted on 06/24/2010 1:48:38 PM PDT by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Got to rig the game before November.


3 posted on 06/24/2010 1:48:53 PM PDT by IrishCatholic (No local Communist or Socialist Party Chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

What is it? Can’t be good, because THEY are in the majority.


4 posted on 06/24/2010 1:49:42 PM PDT by La Enchiladita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

One more nail come November.


5 posted on 06/24/2010 1:50:03 PM PDT by muddler (Obama is either incompetent or malicious, and it makes little difference which.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

What the hell IS it?


6 posted on 06/24/2010 1:50:19 PM PDT by stephenjohnbanker (Support our Troops, and vote out the RINOS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

We’re being distracted with the oil spill and the general. All in the plan.


7 posted on 06/24/2010 1:50:36 PM PDT by RushIsMyTeddyBear (I don't have a 'Cousin Pookie'.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

Another blatantly unconstitutional POS law.

SCOTUS will strike it down and fast.


8 posted on 06/24/2010 1:51:09 PM PDT by LowTaxesEqualProsperity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

It’s bad:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2540415/posts


9 posted on 06/24/2010 1:51:41 PM PDT by wagglebee ("A political party cannot be all things to all people." -- Ronald Reagan, 3/1/75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Yeah....what *is* it??

Tell us!


10 posted on 06/24/2010 1:52:17 PM PDT by Salamander (What'd I do? [I did what the voices told me to] What'd I do?....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker

Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) said that Republicans were just trying to favor big business so that more Republicans could get elected. BP entered the conversation more that once as a the Democrats’ poster-company for a foreign controlled entity that they did not want influencing U.S. elections. In fact, an amendment was approved that would reimpose the ban on direct funding for the holders of certain holder of certain off-shore leases.

Carve-outs from the bills for unions drew particular ire. Lungren said the inequitable treatment was the result of an auction behind closed doors. Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY) said there was a difference between unions and corporations. Union members, he said, are transparent in who they are supporting. He said shareholders should also know who their money is being used to support or oppose in campaigns.

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/454180-House_Passes_DISCLOSE_Act.php


11 posted on 06/24/2010 1:52:39 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: wagglebee
A few weeks ago, the bill seemed dead, but Democrats brought it back after striking a deal Monday that would exempt the powerful National Rifle Association from the requirements of the bill in exchange for their neutrality. A vote was anticipated for last week as well, but Congress went home early for the weekend after a scheduling change. The NRA deal – since modified to cover organizations such as the Sierra Club – exempts 501(c)4 groups from having to report their donors if they have at least 500,000 members, over 10 years of existence, chapters in all 50 states, and receive no more than 15 percent of total contributions from corporations. The NRA has over 4 million members; the environmentalist Sierra Club has 750,000 members.

If that is not a violation of the 1st and 14th amendments I do not knwo what is. Nice going NRA selling out your allies.

12 posted on 06/24/2010 1:53:48 PM PDT by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: stephenjohnbanker
"What the hell IS it?"

From The Hill, just a few days ago...

In full disclosure, I think the Disclose Act is a complete joke, and it is getting funnier.

What is the Disclose Act?

According to The Hill, the Disclose Act is “the Democratic response to a January Supreme Court ruling that overturns limits on spending by corporations and unions in political campaigns. It would tighten transparency requirements associated with corporate and union contributions, including forcing the CEOs of businesses to appear in ads funded by the company.”

The Disclose Act has been shepherded through the Congress by the two guys who are most responsible for electing Democrats to the House and Senate, Rep. Chris Van Hollen (Md.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (N.Y.).

This bill isn’t about high constitutional principles. It isn’t about protecting the freedom of the American people. And it isn’t about creating private-sector jobs or cutting the deficit. -snip-

This legislation, as the Democratic sponsors would probably admit to you over a couple of drinks, is designed to give Democrats a better chance to win election this year and into the future.
13 posted on 06/24/2010 1:54:27 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

I believe to become law, it also has to pass the Senate.


14 posted on 06/24/2010 1:54:41 PM PDT by pennboricua
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

F the NRA.

If they don’t care about the 1st Amendment, I’m not going to fund them anymore on teh 2nd Amendment. Sellouts.


15 posted on 06/24/2010 1:55:23 PM PDT by LowTaxesEqualProsperity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

16 posted on 06/24/2010 1:55:26 PM PDT by mrmeyer ("When brute force is on the march, compromise is the red carpet." Ayn Rand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Salamander

http://www.broadcastingcable.com/article/454180-House_Passes_DISCLOSE_Act.php

House Passes DISCLOSE Act
Disclosure requirements could discourage some from buying campaign ads in November elections
By John Eggerton — Broadcasting & Cable, 6/24/2010 4:11:17 PM

The House on Thursday hotly debated, then passed, the DISCLOSE Act (HR 5175), which could stem some of the expected new flow of political ad dollars into the mid-term elections.

The vote was 219 to 206.

The bill is a response to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision last fall, which allows corporations and unions to directly fund ads supporting or opposing candidates (so-called electioneering communications).

It would require enhanced disclosures for those expenditures, including having the CEO’s of companies appear in TV and radio ads to take responsibility for them. It would also reimpose the ban on direct funding for corporations with at least $10 million in government contracts or for companies with at least 20% foreign ownership, and only 5% if owned by a foreign nation or their representatives or wealth funds.

Opponents of the bill have argued that the additional disclosures could add up to 15 seconds or more, which would take 15-second spots out of the equation entirely, and threaten 30-second spots. Bill backers have pointed out that the bill includes a hardship exemption if it was impossible to convey the substance of the ad along with the disclosures.

What debate there was brought out strong words on both sides, particularly after the House rules committee set aside only an hour for debate on the base bill. Rep. Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) pointed out that the rules committee had given a total of 41 hours to debate about the naming of post offices, but that the DISCLOSE Act, whose contents were not


17 posted on 06/24/2010 1:55:44 PM PDT by Faith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: OldDeckHand

It’s got to be opposed in the Senate. This would essentially kill fundraising and contributions from grassroots groups (it’s aimed at the Tea Party movement).


18 posted on 06/24/2010 1:56:29 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: C19fan

Stunning. I can’t believe the NRA did that. Well, I can, but I don’t want to.


19 posted on 06/24/2010 1:57:15 PM PDT by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: pennboricua
"I believe to become law, it also has to pass the Senate."

Quite right. But, after the passage of Obamacare, I now understand that to be nothing more than a formality, at least until this session has expired.

20 posted on 06/24/2010 1:57:23 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson