Stephanie
Diamond Member
- Jul 11, 2004
- 70,230
- 10,864
- 2,040
well
SNIP:
By Michelle Malkin July 16, 2012 09:26 AM
Always look under the Astroturf mat.
Senate Democrats have failed to pass a budget in nearly 1,200 days.
But they are carving out time today to vote on the loophole-ridden, incumbency protection racket, masquerading as campaign finance reform, dubbed the DISCLOSE Act.
Wait a minute. Didnt they already vote on the DISCLOSE Act?
Why, yes. Yes, they did.
They voted on it in September 2010 before the midterms. And it failed to meet the 60-vote threshold.
I told you two years ago in July 2010 why the DISCLOSE Act was a sham:
You know when a politician starts a sentence with frankly, hes about to lie to your face. The same principle applies to campaign finance legislation dubbed the DISCLOSE Act. The voters instinctive reaction should be: What are they trying to hide now? Drafted out of public view with left-wing lobbyists and rammed through Congress after bypassing committee hearings, this bum bill would have been better named the CLOSEDDOOR Act.
At a Rose Garden press conference on Monday, President Obama decried the influence of shadow groups on elections and urged the Senate to pass the reform sponsored by N.Y. Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer. But the loophole-ridden package exempts large nonprofits with 500,000 or more members. Behemoth labor unions get preferential treatment. Bradley Smith, former Federal Elections Commission chairman, noted that the law places radical speech-squelching restrictions on companies ability to run independent political ads: (I)f youre a company with a government contract of over $10 million (like more than half of the top 50 U.S. companies) or if youre a company with more than 20 percent foreign shareholders, you cant even mention a candidate in an ad for up to a full year before the election. There are no similar prohibitions for unions representing government contractors or unions with foreign membership.
GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell put it more starkly during Tuesdays debate before the Senate cloture vote on the bill: The DISCLOSE Act, he said, is a transparent attempt to rig the fall elections. At bottom, McConnell diagnosed correctly, this is a jobs-protection bill for entrenched incumbents more interested in protecting their hides than protecting the Constitution. While the cloture vote fell three votes short of the needed 60 on Tuesday, Schumer vowed to resurrect the issue again and again and again until we pass it.
read it all here
Michelle Malkin » Dem distraction: Senate to vote on Orwellian DISCLOSE Act…again
SNIP:
By Michelle Malkin July 16, 2012 09:26 AM
Always look under the Astroturf mat.
Senate Democrats have failed to pass a budget in nearly 1,200 days.
But they are carving out time today to vote on the loophole-ridden, incumbency protection racket, masquerading as campaign finance reform, dubbed the DISCLOSE Act.
Wait a minute. Didnt they already vote on the DISCLOSE Act?
Why, yes. Yes, they did.
They voted on it in September 2010 before the midterms. And it failed to meet the 60-vote threshold.
I told you two years ago in July 2010 why the DISCLOSE Act was a sham:
You know when a politician starts a sentence with frankly, hes about to lie to your face. The same principle applies to campaign finance legislation dubbed the DISCLOSE Act. The voters instinctive reaction should be: What are they trying to hide now? Drafted out of public view with left-wing lobbyists and rammed through Congress after bypassing committee hearings, this bum bill would have been better named the CLOSEDDOOR Act.
At a Rose Garden press conference on Monday, President Obama decried the influence of shadow groups on elections and urged the Senate to pass the reform sponsored by N.Y. Democratic Sen. Chuck Schumer. But the loophole-ridden package exempts large nonprofits with 500,000 or more members. Behemoth labor unions get preferential treatment. Bradley Smith, former Federal Elections Commission chairman, noted that the law places radical speech-squelching restrictions on companies ability to run independent political ads: (I)f youre a company with a government contract of over $10 million (like more than half of the top 50 U.S. companies) or if youre a company with more than 20 percent foreign shareholders, you cant even mention a candidate in an ad for up to a full year before the election. There are no similar prohibitions for unions representing government contractors or unions with foreign membership.
GOP Sen. Mitch McConnell put it more starkly during Tuesdays debate before the Senate cloture vote on the bill: The DISCLOSE Act, he said, is a transparent attempt to rig the fall elections. At bottom, McConnell diagnosed correctly, this is a jobs-protection bill for entrenched incumbents more interested in protecting their hides than protecting the Constitution. While the cloture vote fell three votes short of the needed 60 on Tuesday, Schumer vowed to resurrect the issue again and again and again until we pass it.
read it all here
Michelle Malkin » Dem distraction: Senate to vote on Orwellian DISCLOSE Act…again