For decades, when Republicans made the case against campaign-finance reform, they invariably touted disclosure as the panacea that made restrictions unnecessary. As Fred Hiatt explained, "Republicans always dangled this apple in the most alluring way. Political money will find a path, they would insist. Give up! Give in! We will post every donation on the Web, instantly! We will give you transparency! Sunshine! Accountability! What could be more democratic?"
Except, of course, that the right never really meant it. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), a staunch opponent of campaign-finance reform, spoke at the American Enterprise Institute the other day and condemned the Obama administration's efforts to "silence" political speech.
"It is critically important for all conservatives -- and indeed all Americans -- to stand up and unite in defense of the freedom to organize around the causes we believe in, and against any effort that would constrain our ability to do so," McConnell told AEI.
And what are the "efforts" that have McConnell so outraged? The senator "cited a Democratic proposal to require corporations and unions to disclose their spending on political advertising."
Yes, in Mitch McConnell's mind, the DISCLOSE Act is "nothing less than an effort by the government itself to expose its critics to harassment and intimidation, either by government authorities or through third-party allies."
As far as the Senate Minority Leader is concerned, there's nothing wrong with wealthy interests buying American elections -- the real scandal is a proposal to let American voters know who's doing the buying.
In reality, the DISCLOSE Act (Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections) is a fairly modest proposal. In the wake of the Citizens United ruling, Democrats thought it made sense to require corporations, unions, and other interest groups that pay for campaign ads to identify themselves, allowing the public to know who's saying what.
It wasn't even a partisan initiative, at least not completely -- in the House, the proposal even had a Republican co-sponsor.
It would have become law in 2010 were it not for a Republican filibuster. When the bill reached the floor, it had 59 supporters and 39 opponents, which in the broken Senate, means the legislation failed. Proponents only needed one GOP vote, but every Republican in the chamber, including alleged "moderates" like Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine), Susan Collins (R-Maine), and Scott Brown (R-Mass.) refused to give the bill an up-or-down vote.
But McConnell is still afraid the bill might make a comeback, and has taken a firm stand in support of front groups that keep donations secret. This, as far as the Minority Leader is concerned, makes him a champion of the First Amendment.
Because nothing says "freedom" like secret billionaires quietly buying elections out of public view.
Leave a Comment:
I think the GOP is starting to feel the heat from The American People because of the outrageous amounts of money being spent on this campaign and none of it towards the growth of our economy. Again, the GOP have done absolutely 0 in helping The Middle Class and the Poor in this country. Nothing. They spend their time all day defending their own deceiving practices on the taxpayers dollar. I listened to him talking during the press conference. He made no sense at all. How can you defend grown men throwing away billions of dollars and for what? So, they can keep lobbying for Big Oil. Instead of worrying about their future job with these Large Corporations why don't they try keeping their present job and work for The American People what they are being paid to do.
This speech should be used in a Dems ad. Just another way of pointing out how willing the Republicans are to throw the average American under the bus, while they pander to money in their quest for power. The fact that they don't even recognize how much this makes them look like the dirty politicians in a third world country should tell you that along with being corrupt, they are just stupid.
"For decades, when Republicans made the case against campaign-finance reform,..."
Puhlease, Mitch McConnell and the GOP sold their souls to the devil a long, long, long time ago! Of course they don't want transparency, why would they - it's not as though they actually work "for the people" that vote them into office! Just look at the obstructionist way they act in Congress - acting only for their corporate friends and this during the greatest economic calamity WE face caused by their relaxation of the rules and regulations!
Vote them out in November!
I don't know which is worse, the obstruction or the pandering that happens when they control everything. I give you the republican K St. project (Tom Delay and Ric Santorum) as an example of what happens when no one stops the republicans. During that period the corporations were actually writing the legislation they wanted. It was the beginning of ALEC, but on a national level.
I would expect them to be all for disclosure with the unions but not for corporations because we all know that corporations are people HaHa.
"It is critically important for all conservatives -- and indeed all Americans -- to stand up and unite in defense of the freedom to organize around the causes we believe in, and against any effort that would constrain our ability to do so,"
Except unions, of course...
So when are you going to tell everyone about the restrictions, and carveouts, in the Disclose Act? How about the other regs that may affect free speech on the internet? Were you going to mention those? Of course not.
If this were only about transparency, I'm sure it could get passed. But specifying who can and can't spend their money, isn't going to fly. If you can't get Snow and Collins on board there is something seriously wrong in the package.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DISCLOSE_Act
So you think it is a GOOD thing that millionaires and billionaires can secretly buy elections then.
You are right. The exemptions in this bill are ridiculous and it should be brought to the floor and discussed in public view. But, do you really think even if it was "only about transparency" the Republicans would get on board?
Until (and if) we can ever deal with the debacle that is Citizens United, I think most Americans would agree that this is not "free" speech, this is "expensive" speech because that kind of money can drowned out ALL other voices. At the very least, we ordinary citizens, unable to speak with that LOUD a voice, deserve to know who is going to own America
@tesshera
Yes, I think that if this were sole about transparency it would pass. Republicans would love to point the finger at Soros, Hollywood, and unions.
As for expensive speech, I'm not worried. Both sides have plenty of funding.
We need to talk about some vacation land I have for sale just south of Galveston, within sight of the beach.
The republicans are not so stupid that they would risk their access to Wall St., Big Oil, Big Pharm, the Chamber of Commerce, the insurance industry, the 200 invitees at the Koch soirees, the gambling industry, and a veritable horde of other gushers of money just for the opportunity to point their fingers at the comparative trickle that comes from the unions, Soros and Hollywood. With transparency people would be able to see how much each group is giving, and the republicans would look really bad. Even with what is on record now, only two unions are in the top ten donors. The other eight are corporate powers.
I never thought I would type these words but go read Fred Haitt in the WAPO this morning. He says everything you needed to know about the 'bait and switch' of the GOP. Honestly.
That opinion piece is truly amazing!!! Fred Hiatt wrote that?? My first impression was that it was ghost written or he was chemically influenced, legally or otherwise.
Why not just call it MAFIA government?
I agree with Angel#77 above: the GOP is losing the very mask that allowed it to claim it could speak 'for the American people' -- for under that mask we now see that it has always been for the big moneyed interests against 'the people' -- and that 'the American people' they claimed to be defending all these years, is NOT the American people-people but its corporations ("Corporations are people, too, my friend!").
They have been demasked as pro-wealthy, anti-people, and fiscal phonies.
So they double down on this demand for the wealthy to just buy the elections for them outright.
its funny that mitch is saying obama has stiffled people when it is the republican party that has waged war on the middle class, gays, women , and the poor. they are all about over reach of the government and they try to put it on obama and his administration. what a joke. the thing republicans care about is taking from the middle class and giving it to the richest people and companys in the country. where are the jobs they promised when they took the house? where are the morals and the ethics on the right?
Since 2008 our Country has been going through the worst economic catastrophe in 70 years; our citizens losing jobs, their homes, their cars, unable to pay their bills, and
in many cases having difficulty feeding their family. President Obama took over an economy that was collapsing on itself. It was a time for Republicans and Democrats
to work together to avoid further Economic disaster and get money flowing into
our economy.
Instead what we got was a 1/20/09 dinner held at the Caucus Room, where 12 of our Elected Officials and a future GOP Candidate for President came up with a plan to “Just Say No” to anything this President put before Congress. The elected official’s at this dinner were: The Guest List: Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA) Rep. Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), Rep. Pete Sessions (R-TX), Rep. Jeb Hensarling (R-TX), Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-MI), Rep. Dan Lungren (R-CA), Sen. Jim DeMint (SC-R), Sen. Jon Kyl
(AZ-R), Sen. Tom Coburn (OK-R), Sen. John Ensign (NV-R) and Sen. Bob Corker
(TN-R). Non-lawmakers present Newt Gingrich – future GOP Candidate. This included saying NO to plans but forth that previously they were in favor of, but because this President was submitting them they said NO. In 2010 Mitch McConnell stated “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president” How naive of me to think the single most important thing for them to
achieve would have been a bi-partisan way to bring our Country back from this
Economic disaster.
My message to each of the individuals listed above and the remaining Republican’s holding a seat in Congress you are Cowards. None of the elected Republicans sitting in the Senate or the House had the Courage or Integrity to do what was best for our citizens and put their Country’s Economic Recovery over their Party and their desire to be in Control of our Country, and for most of them their hatred that a black man was in the White House. Any elected official who signs a pledge to an individual and/or entity corrupts the process and themselves. They were elected to represent "We the People", but when they pledge allegiance to an individual or entity the represent "Them the People". Cantor, Ryan, McConnell, Boehner and their leader Norquist say Republicans do not compromise; this is a part of life you comprise in your personal relationships
and you compromise in business dealings.
Lorr-2611132
This is one of the best posting I've read. Thanks for presenting this information in this manner. These politicians need to be reminded when they say idiotic things like, “The single most important thing we want to achieve is for President Obama to be a one-term president” is to bring to attention what we (the American people) want to be their priority. Since we didn't do this we ended up with a Tea Party who is now telling the Republican party what they want to be their priority. The American people have a voice other than a vote. My congressman is probably hating me right now after all the emails and letters I have sent. Yet he represent my voice and until he is no longer in office he'll hear mine. I think the rest of our American citizens should do the same. Our news media is not going to ask the tough questions. We have to do this ourselves though our represenatives.
Bravo Lorr
Please understand that it's really is the American people that is supporting the 'Buy the politician philosophy'. I say this is because if the American people didn't vote for the people who spend the most, the money wouldn't go to those politicians. Sometimes I feel the American people are sheep of a sort. They just follow the person with the biggest mouth and or stick. They should look into the 'character' of the politician first and foremost. Instead they look at what they ‘say’ they stand for instead what they actually ‘do’ stand for. Romney wants to be in politics so bad that he'll say whatever to get elected. Is that the 'character' that we want representing the United States of America and its citizens? What does it say to the rest of the world when Americans know they are being tricked and still support the trickster? Bottom line Americans tend to fall for stupid politicians and then turn around and blame the politician when they are the ones who voted for them in the first place. Lastly...I'm getting tired of people complaining about policies and not offering a better alternative. I watch FOX News just to see their side of the story and all I hear is complaints. My mom and I am sure many others have said, ‘complaining is fine, but you better bring an alternative than what is being presented. Otherwise you'll never get what you want.’
Kentucky, why do you keep voting for this idiot? He is NOT on your side.
Consider the Dinosaur Museum of Ky., where man and Dinosaurs are shown together and the curator claims the world is ten thousand years old. Kentucky loves Dinosaurs but hates reality.
He keeps getting elected because of the jigsaw like voting districts that we have all across the country that sequester voters of one party into one group (usually very small wealthy ones for Republicans) It's an outdated system which destroys the idea of one person one vote.
There is alot I could say on this subject and still might repost but, I have always wondered why elected officials could not be sued for their breach of contract with the public that voted them in. It might be a hard thing to prove but these guys get into office and , if nothing else, for the shear insider trading benefits, vote the way corporations and Wall Street would have them cast their vote.
Thank you, thank you, thank you Racheal for bringing this out to the american people. Let the people see the lunacy of the republican. Racheal, keep up the great work.
Finely I'm starting to see allot more positive post Americans are waking up.Its our country and its being ran by a bunch of cowards who buy their way into office with their lies and big bank account.Its like the richest team in baseball who go out and offer the best players the most money or offer riches to any potential threats then send them down to the minors and its all because of greed. And why don't republicans like Obama because hes a regular American citizen that doesn't try to deceive the American people he tells it like it is and he does what he says not to mention his ethnic background. Now its time to stop the heartless crooks and cut them down to size and the same goes for the big corporations that soak up billions of hard earned money and eventually leave the U.S.A anyway taking our jobs with them.Remember there's a hell of allot more of us then there is of them together we will win this war on avarice government and greedy selfish corporations.
McConnell couldn't say or do a truly beneficial thing for America at GUNPOINT. He is a bloated pit viper in a cheap suit. If they'd offer a trade, I'd even keep CANTOR around to lose McConnell! (But not by MUCH!)
holy m-ther f-ing crap, he is OUT of his freaking mind. no no i'm serious. I think he is totally insane. lock that man up! he's now the biggest nutter in the GOP and that is REALLY saying something. WOW.
Pandering to the big business contributors, Republican and Democrat, at the expense of the American middle class. This man is not alone in his contempt for you and I. His concern is to further the interests of the wealthy only, with no sense of social responsability or self respect to his covenant with the American people. He is a whore. He is a liar. He and his kind sow animosity by distorting facts, encouraging ignorance and confusion while pedaling a message of hate and powerlessness with the intent of further polarizing the population. This man is not an example of responsible leadership. He is a thief of the worst kind and will be held accountable.
WE, THE PEOPLE, are indowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights. Clearly those inalienable constitutional rights are HUMAN rights.
No non-human entity, be it a for-profit business corporation, or a not-for-profit issue advocacy group, or a labor union, should have any inalienable constitutional rights seperate and apart from the individuals who work for them, or who belong to them.
WE, THE PEOPLE, create corporations those corporations should ONLY have those legal rights - rights that we give them when we pass the laws of incorporations.
If WE, THE PEOPLE, want corporations to be barred, completely, from contributing ANY corporate money to influence elections, we should be able to do that - and the SUPREME COURT - the smallest, unelected, branch of the Federal Governement should not be able to stop us.
Since the Supreme Court has taken that right to regulate corporations away from us, WE, THE PEOPLE, have no choice. If we want to reclaim our ability to control corporations - and I know I do! - we have to Amend the U.S. Constitution so that it says that "Rights recognized under the Constitution belong to human beings, only."
As for limiting the ability of billionaires - like Sheldon Adelsen and the Koch Brothers - to spend unlimited amounts of money on electioneering, I agree with Sen. McConnell - it IS a radical idea. It is a radical idea caused by the utter destruction that that unlimited spending is having on our "small d/small r" democratic republic.
Money is NOT speech. Money is a tool that allows people to amplify their speech. Rich people like Sheldon Adelsen to have a right to free speech - we all do. But, a rich individual like Sheldon Adelsen should not be able to use his money to amplify his speech so loudly that he drowns out the speech of millions of other Americans.
If we can get all of the money - corporate money, and idividual billionaire money - out of the political system, then, and only then, will we be able to have meaningful debates about the problems that face our society.
McConnell waxes poetically about having a system where the best ideas "win out" but he supports a system where policy debates aren't decided on the merits of the ideas being debated, but, instead are decided based on the amount of money that a group has to promote their ideas.
McConnell wants to maintain the system, where the GOP has a huge monetary advantage, because he knows that GOP ideas are so wildly unpopular that the ONLY way for the GOP to win a political debate is to buy it.
If anyone reading this is interested in supporting the bipartisan movement to amend the U.S. Constitution, so that it clearly and unequivically states that 1) rights recognized under the Constitution belong to human beings, only; and, that 2) Money is NOT speech; go to www.movetoamend.org.
Steve Justino, National Executive Committee, MOVE TO AMEND
KoachnRef is right, up to a point. We don't, however, directly vote for the one who has the most money. We too often vote for the one who diverts our attention by spending the most money on campaign ads. We think we're looking into the candidate's character and vision by absorbing this paid-for-propaganda. Our votes are being bought without us realizing it.
More to the point, however, is that secrecy and anonymity is the real "effort that would constrain our ability" to "unite in defense of the freedom" to express our ideas through spending ... uh ... I mean speaking. Billionaires want anonymity to prevent what they call "retaliation," which means people deciding to spend their money elsewhere when they know who's paying for an ad they dislike. But in the language of Citizens United, that's not retaliation, that's the free exchange of ideas through counter-spending (shootout to Karen Finney). McConnell wants the freedom to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater without any consequences, at least not for his billionaires.