Secret Funding of U.S. Chamber’s Political Ads May Be Outlawed

[kpete]

Source: Bloomberg

Secret Funding of U.S. Chamber’s Political Ads May Be Outlawed
April 07, 2010, 12:22 AM EDT
By Jonathan D. Salant and Mark Drajem

April 7 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. companies would lose their ability to secretly finance political advertising run by organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce under a bill being considered by Democratic lawmakers.

The proposed legislation is a response to a Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations to spend unlimited amounts of their own money on political ads. The Jan. 21 decision triggered concern that companies would funnel unprecedented sums of cash into the Chamber’s decades-old system of anonymously funded pro- business campaigns.

President Barack Obama criticized the court opinion in his Jan. 28 State of the Union address, saying it would “open the floodgates for special interests.” The bill, which may be introduced as early as next week, would require nonprofit groups, unions and trade associations including the Chamber to identify who pays for ads designed to sway opinion on candidates for federal office.

“The Chamber is going to end up with at least one very undesirable element: The public is going to know exactly which corporations are the major funders,” said Craig Holman, who handles campaign finance issues for Public Citizen, a Washington group that supports more regulation of political giving.

Read more: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-07/secret-funding-of-u-s-chamber-s-political-ads-may-be-outlawed.html

[LiberalFighter]

1. I want a tax on those contributions too.

[avaistheone1]

5. I like your idea.

I hope that idea is on the table.

[NewJeffCT]

14. I don't think political donations are tax deductible now?

I know when I donate, they normally specify that my donation is NOT tax deductible.

Are Chamber donations tax deductible?

[freebrew]

21. Tax deductible or not...

a thread yesterday revealed that US corps.(2 out of 3) don't pay taxes anyway.
The tax should be passed on to the shareholders, or at least the board of directors.

[happygoluckytoyou]

45. IN A RELATED STORY fox news reports "if its a secret then how do you know about it" rights violated

[BadGimp]

30. The concept is intriging I must confess..

I recently found myself pondering this very idea.

I like it as a way to create push back on the Corporate Advertisers. At the same time it could create a pool of cash for opposing views who lack the financial resources to counter the corporate saturation bombing advertising efforts.

Which end of the transaction do you tax? The buyer or the seller? Either likely would be challenged as a Tax of Free Speech.

But taxing the sale might work in that we have there existing precedents of say Tobacco and Alcohol taxes which are collected and redistributed in a meager attempt to partially offset some of the negative effect of these products. Gasoline comes to mind as well.

[LiberalFighter]

32. We do a program for our Democratic Congressional District Dinner

and we have to pay taxes on the printing.

[HughMoran]

2. Good. Chamber is a right-wing tool organization now, nothing more

They have become one of the most despicable actors in the right-wing hate machine. They run more ads locally than all of the campaigns combined - I'm sick of their lying and hate. They must be held accountable, or destroyed - the options are few for them.

[h9socialist]

29. Actually, I agree except . . .

. . . you got the tail wagging the dog! The Tea Party movement and the whole right-wing are puny-pikers next to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. Under capitalism, the business community would prefer the public not know the extent of its political power and influence. For the most part, the right-wing ends up being the bell-hop for corporate domination.

[w4rma]

3. Good. Light up the roaches. (nt)

[mac56]

4. If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to worry about.

Isn't that what we heard over and over from the conservatives in the '90s?

[GoCubsGo]

7. Not just the '90s

That has been their standard line when it comes to the Patriot Act and warrantless wire-tapping, too.

[liberation]

17. Wasn't that one of the lines McCarthy used back in the 50s?

[NewJeffCT]

23. Why yes, yes it was

He was also the one that started using "Democrat" Party instead of Democratic.

[Jim Sagle]

24. McCarthy was referring to private citizens and their personal affairs.

Whereas, the current issue is PUBLIC CORPORATIONS and their PUBLIC SPENDING to control our politics. So yes, they're the same, except that they're opposite.

Take your DLC spin and shove it.

[Mr. Sparkle]

6. As an idea, it is a good one. But, as a response to the Supreme court ruling earlier this year, it

is pretty lame. Right now is and will be, their best chance to remove corporations from elections (under our current majority)... i hope this is not the best that they can come up with it. It falls a long way short of what i was hoping for and expecting.

[pwb]

8. i call them the U.S. Chamber of Imports

and the chamber of profits.

[ooglymoogly]

20. How bout the "Chamber of Horrors"....

and horrific grifters.

[HillbillyBob]

41. Chamber pots?

Public Campaign funding and up the taxes that hedge funders and corpses pay (0r that they are NOT paying now).
Fairness Doctrine , regulate the so called derivatives out of existence

[ooglymoogly]

47. lol. nt

[defendandprotect]

9. kickey --

[Doremus]

10. All they'll do is create shell corporations to protect the identities of real donors.

Unless there are provisions to prevent it, I wouldn't expect any corpo willing to out itself on political advertising.

[liberation]

16. Exactly!

These are corporations which can cook books in order to hide billions of dollars, a few million dollars in political contributions would be way too easy for them to hide. Create a shell corporation, made all sorts of creative financial devices, and voila.

All these shenanigans would end up the minute any cabinet instructs the IRS that if corporations are "people" that they should be held to the same taxation rates as actual "people." Alas, all we see are corporations being considered persons in order to benefit from all sorts of rights and protections, but they stop being people when it comes to pay up their fair share of taxes to pay for those same protections and rights. Ain't that a b*tch....

[SocialistLez]

39. Wal-Mart actually pays

employees to donate to political campaigns.

It's one reason my current (but hopefully not for too long) Senator, Blanche Lincoln, has so much cash.

[patrice]

11. WHY is Transparency such a huge, big, frakking imposition?????

[Oldtimeralso]

12. K & R and proud to help the truth to be revealed. n/t

[NewJeffCT]

13. The CoC has $400 million in the bank

so far - I doubt they'll care that much... they'll just drown out their opponents in a storm of ads.

And, if the Chamber has $400 million now - does that mean $1 billion or more by election day?

[old mark]

15. I can hear the RWers screaming now about Obama's socialism!!!

Fuck 'em - I love it when they scream!!!!


mark

[RedCloud]

18. Well Scream and Scream again!

[h9socialist]

28. Just a matter of interest:

What's with this thing of Groucho Marx and Nathalie Cordone. Is this to suggest "Hasta Siempre, Comandante"?

[perdita9]

19. Can't wait to see the GOP protest against this

All their talk about transparency in government is just that -- talk.

[The Backlash Cometh]

22. Yeeeessss!

Why is there no smiley icon for a fisty, "YEEESSSS!"

[GreenTea]

25. It won't go through, they'll simply sue and the courts will back the corporations, backed Chamber

Same as it ever was - Same as it always will be!

(Corporations and their money ultimately always win out in the end).

[laughingliberal]

27. I don't see it. Unless the court is ready to do away with the public's right to know

which has always been a 1st amendment issue.

[provis99]

37. the public does NOT have a right to know.

If anything, corporations have a right to privacy, unless publicly traded, in which case they must only reveal their accounting practices. This latest move by the Democrats is more window-dressing nonsense, designed to make us fools think they're on our side.

[laughingliberal]

26. This is a great idea! And I don't see a damned thing the court can do about it

Unless they want to rule the rights of corporations to influence our elections is now more important that the public's right to know...I don't see an opening to strike it down.

[Uncle Joe]

31. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, kpete.

[and-justice-for-all]

33. Their ads are revolting and drive me up a wall....nt

[alp227]

34. Secret funding = corrupt politics as usual.

Good thing some legislators had the brains to think about that.

[lonestarnot]

35. Good! Fuck them!

[JohnWxy]

36. RECOMMENDED

[fascisthunter]

38. disgusting abuse of power

[WhoIsNumberNone]

40. 2 predictions:

1. This bill will never become law. No republican will vote for it. They will do all the same stuff they did for health care reform: smear & fear campaigns, filibuster and ultimately vote against it. Meanwhile, Democrats who are on the corporate payroll will add all kinds of onerous riders and pork spending to make it suck as much as possible if it does pass.

2. Should it pass the Chamber will bring legal action, and the republican Supreme Court will probably find some way to declare it unconstitutional.

[donheld]

43. Thank you for that

could be right

[joycean]

42. I'm not allowed to secretly donate

so why should anyone else be? After all, if corporations really are people (insert vomit here), then why should they have special privileges?

[Maineman]

44. All issue ads or political ads should be required to declare

All issue ads and political ads should be required to state clearly IN THE AD all direct or indirect funding that involves nonpersons - like corporations, corporate officers and board members, or foreign entities whether or not they are persons. And the first-time penalty should be a fine that is double what they spent on the ad. Penalties can increase with repeat offenses eventually leading to jail time for relevant corporate officers (CEO, etc.).

Politicians who lie to the public should be subject to the same penalties. Yea, like this will happen anytime soon. We can dream.

[Historic NY]

46. Meanwhile my local county chamber is vacationing in China..seriously.

I still don't know what piddly ass radio station personalities have to offer China. Its more like an all expense paid trip to the business chumps that fund them. I laughed when I saw the photo.