Democrats are forming a group that will accept secret denotations to reelect Obama, like the Republican groups, wrongly made legal by Citizens United, that dominated 2010. Some on the left say this is evidence of a sell out. I don’t think so. After examining the issue more deeply than the knee-jerk reactions of some, I want you to contact the White House to force donation disclosure for all.
Let’s state as clearly as possible that political spending from anonymous donors is bad for our democracy — whether it’s coming from Republicans or Democrats. Now that leading Dems have announced a new group designed to raise and spend big bucks on Obama’s reelection — some of it from undisclosed donors — voters will be seeing reams of ads from the Dem side without knowing who paid for them.
That’s wrong. Voters have every right to know who’s funding ads supporting Dems and Republicans alike.
But that said, the charge coming from the right this morning — that this amounts to a brazen and hypocritical sell-out on the part of Democrats — demands a response.
Please, folks, let’s approach this hypocrisy charge with a bit of nuance. Here’s the Republican National Committee’s statement:
The Obama White House has completely walked away from the mantle of “change” in order to embrace the type of politics they once relentlessly attacked. Just as when he reneged on his promise to campaign within the public finance system, this President is all too happy to embrace and discard “principles” according to what is most politically expedient for him.
The Rove-founded group Crossroads GPS added: “Obama’s brazen hypocrisy, in encouraging his own operatives to start groups exactly like the ones he demagogued last year, shows how cynical this President can be when it comes to perpetuating his own power.”
There’s one problem with this argument: Obama and Democrats would close this group down tomorrow if groups on the right agreed to do the same. This is not a matter of spin or argument. It’s a matter of simple factual reality that Obama and Democrats have long supported, and continue to support, legislation that would outlaw such non-disclosure — even for themselves. Dems believe the rules that allow undisclosed spending are wrong, and support changing those rules — even for themselves. By contrast, Republicans want to keep the rules as they are, because they believe undisclosed spending is a right that should be protected… [emphasis added]
Inserted from <Washington Post>
Democrats in the House passed legislation requiring full disclosure. Republicans in the Senate filibustered it. This shows that it is false to claim there is no difference between the parties. Anyone foolish enough to believe such tripe should compare Sotomayor and Kagan with Roberts and Alito.
There’s been buzz about an executive order that could potentially end the secrecy. Lets tell Obama to bring it into the open, as suggested in an email I received yesterday.
President Obama is circulating a draft of an important Executive Order that could enhance disclosure in campaign finance regulations. This order would require disclosure of contributions to "third party" or "independent" expenditure groups by corporations receiving government contracts (which would include big spenders like Koch Industries, JPMorgan Chase, Exxon Mobil, General Electric, and Bank of America).
During the 2010 elections, much of the unlimited election spending made possible by the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision was kept secret by groups taking advantage of the the tax code. The President’s proposed order would lift the veil on secret spending in time for the 2012 elections, at least for those corporations receiving government contracts. Tell President Obama you support this plan and ask him to sign this Executive Order.
The Executive Order is a step toward limiting the secret corporate spending that tainted the 2010 elections by groups hiding behind their nonprofit status to keep funding sources secret. Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, for example, spent almost $17 million in 2010 attacking Democratic candidates without disclosing who was funding these attack ads. Over 46% of election spending in 2010 ($135.6 million) was entirely secret. Polls show that 92 percent of Americans want greater disclosure – add your voice to that number by contacting President Obama.
Please call the White House at 202-456-1111 and tell President Obama to require disclosure of contributions to "third party" or "independent" expenditure groups by corporations receiving government contracts. Or send an email by clicking here.
I called and I emailed.
14 Responses to “Action Alert: Force Donation Disclosure”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
If you’re not using a tool that’s available then you’re at a distinct disadvantage. I don’t like the secrecy in political donations, but it’s ludicrous for Democrats to do everything publicly while Republicans hide int the closet. No poker player would show their hand to the rest of the table before they’ve played it.
I agree, Blue. We can’t take stone knives onto a nuclear battlefield.
I’m with Blue. Where are our millionaire liberals to fight back at the Koch brothers?
Until Citizens United is tossed out (don’t hold your breath until a right-wing SCOTUS kicks it), fire must be used to fight fire. Fortunately, the firemen are now behind progressives 100%.
Notice that I say liberals and progressives, not Democrats. Keep your eye out for good Independent candidates to support at all levels.
I’m still waiting for Scalia to fall face first into a big pile of spaghetti and meatballs, having a massive coronary. 😈
A big pile of caca would work as well.
Marva, there’s a difference here. Millionaires who support the progressive side of this issue are doing so against self-interest out of ethical integrity. Those who support the Republican side do so out of greed and have no ethical integrity. Sadly, the latter outnumber the former.
Only if they have a viable chance of winning. Splitting the left wing elects Republicans.
true, If we divide we lose. I’m afraid that because the left if made up of individuals it makes us weaker than the right because they don’t mind losing their identity to fit into a tightly defined mold. Their lack of persona actually helps them win but I would say its a pyrrhic win at best
Welcome Mruky! 🙂
You make an excellent point. I usually say, “Organizing Democrats is like herding cats.” But the truth simply is that lefties thing while righties goose-step.
I called and sent a FAX to the White House in support of campaign finance/donation disclosure.
That said, Greg Sargent of the Washington Post has an interesting piece about Democrats forming Priorities USA as a progressive counter-weight to try to balance the scales out a bit. The kicker is that it, too, will consist of undisclosed big-time donors. Sargent asked Paul Begala, one of the founders of Priorities USA, to defend his actions against charges of hypocrisy:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/post/paul-begala-youre-damn-right-well-spend-undisclosed-cash-to-battle-the-right/2011/03/03/AFem5LFF_blog.html
Sen. Russ Feingold, whom I deeply admired, is dead-set against it (and the link above provides a link to his thoughts). I’m a wee bit ambivalent, but will stand with Begala on this one. As someone once said: If you sit down to play a game of chess, and the guy across the table just just up hits you in the nose for no reason … then you are no longer playing chess!
Thanks for the link! You’re so good with that stuff. All I can do is curse a blue streak. 😆
Ditto.
Thanks Nameless. Ideally I agree with Feingold, but too much idealism loses. Reality demands the former view.
The problem is that lots of the heat on this is coming from the regressive “Obama can do no right” left.
Signed and delivered. I think every non profit (and I don’t care who the fuck you are) needs to disclose their donors, period. Prove that we are bigger and better than those Rethugs – show your donors loud and proud.
I agree, and the rules need to be level.