Replies

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