House OKs Bill Capping Nonprofits' Gifts

[cal04]

The House on Wednesday voted to limit the multimillion-dollar donations to nonprofit groups that changed the face of American politics in the 2004 presidential election. Majority Republicans said they were closing what they contended was a gaping loophole. Democrats portrayed the vote as an effort to undercut their supporters. Republican support carried the day in the 218-209 vote to cap contributions to "527" political groups. The outcome was a sharp turnaround from 2002, when Republicans resisted the successful Democratic-led legislation to limit campaign spending.

The flow of unregulated contributions "still dominates the political landscape," said Rep. David Dreier, R-Calif. Urging constraints on the nonprofit groups that overwhelmingly favored Democratic causes in 2004, he said, "Now it's going to 527s instead of the political parties." Democrats protested that Republicans were interested mainly in protecting their fundraising edge. "Today the Republicans are doing what they so often do. They are trying to gag their opponents and further empower their supporters," said Democratic Whip Steny Hoyer of Maryland. The "527" refers to a section of the tax law. These groups are tax-exempt organizations that use voter mobilization and issue advertisements to influence federal elections.

They blossomed after a campaign finance law in 2002 banned federal candidates and the national parties from accepting unlimited donations from individuals, unions and corporations. The legislation would require such to abide by the contribution limits imposed on other political committees. Donors could contribute only $25,000 a year for partisan voter mobilization activities and $5,000 a year for direct expenditures on federal elections.

(snip)
Democrats claim the main GOP objective is to undercut groups that are antagonistic to Republican causes. They say constricting 527s would shift political contributions to other business and social welfare organizations, categorized as 501(c) groups; these groups have some restrictions on political activities but, unlike 527s, do not have to identify donors. The limits would "hamstring independent groups while they keep open the flow to trade organizations that can spend unlimited amounts of money," said Rep. Juanita Millender-McDonald, D-Calif. "They are restricting unions and these independent groups. That is just mean-spirited."

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/campaign_spending

[enough]

1. "mean-spirited"

Now there's a real electiton-winning slogan. There must be some better way to talk about this, as true as that may be.


Thanks for posting this . Nominating.