Now why would the U.S. Chamber of Commerce be so freaked out about this? Hmmmm.

[sufrommich]

It's a good rule of thumb: If the U.S. Chamber of Commerce -- the trade association for large corporations -- is whipped up about something, there's probably good reason for the public to strongly back whatever has sent the Chamber into fits.

Well, the Chamber is apoplectic over a modest Obama administration proposed executive order that would require government contractors to reveal all of their campaign-related spending.

This is a case where the rule of thumb works. The proposed executive order would provide important information about campaign spending by large corporations, and work to reduce the likelihood that contracts are provided as payback for campaign expenditures. You can urge the administration to stand up to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce by signing the petition here.

The U.S. Chamber is of course no stranger to using exaggerated rhetoric to advance its positions. But its opposition to the Executive Order is astounding even by the standards of the Chamber.

A driving purpose of the Executive Order is to prevent corruption; the phenomenon of campaign contributors being given preferential access for contracting is so widely acknowledged that it has a slang name: "pay-to-play." In a spell-binding bit of Alice-in-Wonderland logic, the Chamber is arguing that the Executive Order will actually enable pay-to-play abuses!

http://www.alternet.org/news/150887/us_chamber_freaks_out_over_modest_obama_proposal_that_would_require_gov%27t_contractors_to_disclose_campaign_spending/


I hope this comes to light. I'll use it to decide where my money goes.

[OHdem10]

1. CofC spent millions without identifying donars in the last election.

They did not hide the fact that they were out to
defeat Democrats who did not support their agenda.
Ask Barbara Boxer what it is like to be in the crosshairs
of Cof C.

[sufrommich]

2. I think the question is,if the CofC is so sure that Boxer is a

threat to the U.S. , why fight the transparency? Businesses will suffer if consumers are made more aware of their politics and the Cof C knows it.

[MadMaddie]

3. The Repugs up in WA are fighting it too

they are scared.

[Firebrand Gary]

4. Here is how the vote went down. (For Cloture)

I wonder how the people of Massachusetts will feel about this?

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2010-220

Roll Call Votes
111th Congress: Senate Vote #220 (Jul 27, 2010)
Cloture vote on the Motion to Proceed to S. 3628
Purpose: Cloture votes are used in the Senate to end debate and move to a final up-or-down vote on the matter. The Senate cannot move forward until cloture is agreed to. Voting against cloture is essentially a filibuster. Because it takes 3/5ths of senators to achieve cloture, it is used as a tool by those against the matter to avoid the final simple-majority vote. Read more at Filibusted.us.

Number: Senate Vote #220 in 2010
Date: Jul 27, 2010 3:22PM
Result: Cloture Motion Rejected
Related Bill: S. 3628 <111th>: Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act
Totals Democrats Republicans Independents
All Votes

Needed To Win
Yea: 57 (57%)
56 0 1
Nay: 41 (41%)
1 40 0
Present: 0 (0%)
0 0 0
Not Voting: 2 (2%)
0 1 1
Required: 3/5 of 100 votes (=60 votes)
(Vacancies in Congress will affect vote totals.)



Alabama
Nay AL Sessions, Jefferson
Alaska
Yea AK Begich, Mark
Arizona
Nay AZ Kyl, Jon
Arkansas
Yea AR Pryor, Mark
California
Yea CA Feinstein, Dianne
Colorado
Yea CO Udall, Mark
Connecticut
Not Voting CT Lieberman, Joseph
Delaware
Yea DE Carper, Thomas
Yea DE Kaufman, Edward
Florida
Yea FL Nelson, Bill
Georgia
Nay GA Chambliss, Saxby
Hawaii
Yea HI Akaka, Daniel
Idaho
Nay ID Risch, James
Illinois
Yea IL Burris, Roland
Yea IL Durbin, Richard
Indiana
Nay IN Lugar, Richard
Iowa
Yea IA Harkin, Thomas
Kansas
Nay KS Roberts, Pat
Kentucky
Nay KY McConnell, Mitch
Louisiana
Yea LA Landrieu, Mary
Maine
Nay ME Collins, Susan
Nay ME Snowe, Olympia
Maryland
Yea MD Cardin, Benjamin
Massachusetts
Nay MA Brown, Scott
Yea MA Kerry, John
Michigan
Yea MI Levin, Carl
Yea MI Stabenow, Debbie Ann
Minnesota
Yea MN Franken, Al
Yea MN Klobuchar, Amy
Mississippi
Nay MS Cochran, Thad
Nay MS Wicker, Roger
Missouri
Yea MO McCaskill, Claire
Montana
Yea MT Baucus, Max
Yea MT Tester, Jon
Nebraska
Nay NE Johanns, Mike
Yea NE Nelson, Ben
Nevada
Not Voting NV Ensign, John
New Hampshire
Yea NH Shaheen, Jeanne
New Jersey
Yea NJ Lautenberg, Frank
Yea NJ Menendez, Robert
New Mexico
Yea NM Bingaman, Jeff
Yea NM Udall, Tom
New York
Yea NY Gillibrand, Kirsten
North Carolina
Yea NC Hagan, Kay
North Dakota
Yea ND Conrad, Kent
Ohio
Yea OH Brown, Sherrod
Oklahoma
Nay OK Inhofe, James
Oregon
Yea OR Merkley, Jeff
Pennsylvania
Yea PA Casey, Robert
Rhode Island
Yea RI Reed, John
Yea RI Whitehouse, Sheldon
South Carolina
Nay SC Graham, Lindsey
South Dakota
Yea SD Johnson, Tim
Tennessee
Nay TN Alexander, Lamar
Nay TN Corker, Bob
Texas
Nay TX Cornyn, John
Nay TX Hutchison, Kay
Utah
Nay UT Hatch, Orrin
Vermont
Yea VT Sanders, Bernard
Virginia
Yea VA Warner, Mark
Yea VA Webb, Jim
Washington
Yea WA Cantwell, Maria
West Virginia
Yea WV Goodwin, Carte
Yea WV Rockefeller, John
Wisconsin
Yea WI Kohl, Herbert
Wyoming
Nay WY Barrasso, John
Nay WY Enzi, Michael

[sufrommich]

13. I see Lieberman couldn't be bothered to vote. nt

[LevelB]

5. Money is fungible

They are making political donations with tax payer dollars...

[tclambert]

8. And foreign dollars.

The anonymity part of the Citizens United Supreme Court decision allows foreign money to influence American elections. The US Chamber of Commerce accepts foreign money and spends some of it on politics.

That foreign money aspect seems to me enough grounds to overturn Citizens United.

[Enthusiast]

6. We know for sure the U.S. Chamber of Commerce

does not represent the interests of the people of the United States, if they ever did. Now we know for certain.

[Hubert Flottz]

7. They are out to quash what's left of American democracy.

They should move to Nazi Germany 1939.

[Foolacious]

11. Thank you

Thank you for using "quash". I thought it had disappeared. And thank you especially for not using "squash" when you meant "quash".

[Enthusiast]

12. They are quashing the hell out of us...nt

[otohara]

18. Consultants on Shipping Jobs Overseas

that's what the Chamber does now and they're making fists of money.

Despise this organization - and United States shouldn't be part of their name IMO. They are a lobbying firm plain and simple.

[MaeScott]

9. K and R. nt

[Historic NY]

10. I urge him to do it immediately the Republicans are trying to carry water here...

and its time to expose them for just what they are. Some people think the US in Chamber mean Uninted States but it doesn't it means us (them) against US (the people). They are not a government agency but a lobbying firm with many foreign business attachments.

[ck4829]

14. K&R

[emulatorloo]

15. Kick and thanks for posting this. n/t

[Snoutport]

16. kr important stuff!

[JDPriestly]

17. If Obama successfully implements this, it could be the most

positive and important thing he does during his presidency.

This is what we wanted when we voted for change.

[Plucketeer]

20. I agree

But so far, the changes HAVEN'T been the ones we voted for, based on what the candidate told us. Maybe the "Change" we were to believe in was changes to what the candidate had promised.

[defendandprotect]

19. kr