(Again, another instance of the truth attempting to be silenced. These politicians and governmental officials are so afraid of the public back lash from when the public finds out about the truth, and not what these people are feeding them, that they are willing to destroy the Constitution to remain in power. They will find some way some how to negate the constitution, and the Supreme Court if they can not stack it soon enough, so that they can remain in power, because they believe they are smarter than yu, and know better how to run your life than you do. SDL)
House Democrats earlier this week attempted to quash opposition to their new campaign finance bill by carving out an exemption expressly for the National Rifle Association. But that sparked enough of an uproar from the party’s left flank that today’s vote on the bill has been postponed, the Washington Post reports.
“Top Democrats abandoned plans for a Friday vote in the House on the legislation, known as the DISCLOSE Act, after liberal groups and members of the Congressional Black Caucus rose up against the deal with the NRA,” the Post reports. “A lobbying blitz by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and other business groups also undermined support for the legislation, aides said.”
The DISCLOSE Act is designed to push back against the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in Federal Election Commission. v. Citizens United, which removed most corporate and union spending limits on political campaigns. But opposition from the NRA and other groups threatens to stymie the bill.
Democrats this week had proposed what’s known as a manager’s amendment, offered by Maryland Democratic Rep. Chris Van Hollen, creating exemptions from some campaign finance disclosures for groups with the following characteristics: 1 million members in all 50 states; a lifespan of at least 10 years; acceptance of no more than 15 percent of funding from corporations or unions. The exemption was specifically designed to be met by the NRA, congressional sources said, and it was unclear if any other organization would have qualified.
Now, however, Democrats are trying to backpedal and say the original exemption was not tailor-made for the NRA. “It was never his intent to carve out an exemption only for the NRA,” said one Democratic aide about Van Hollen. The aide, who requested anonymity because he isn’t authorized to comment publicly on pending legislation, claimed that if Van Hollen did have that intent, he could have narrowed the criteria for the exemption to meet only the NRA’s profile. But since Democrats at the time were only certain that the NRA complied with the exemption requirements, that claim seems to be a distinction without a difference.
DISCLOSE Act opponents, liberal groups, and several lawmakers took vigorous exception to the exemption, precisely because it appeared only to apply to the NRA. Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein of California said “the bill is the DISCLOSE Act, not the ‘Everyone Except the NRA DISCLOSE Act’ ” in a statement slamming the legislation Wednesday.
On Wednesday, the Alliance for Justice, a liberal legal advocacy group, sent a letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a California Democrat, protesting the exemption. The letter, signed by 44 additional groups, read in part:
We must respectfully express our profound opposition to the effort to create an exemption from the disclosure requirements for large, powerful organizations, which, given the amendment’s language, in reality only applies to the National Rifle Association and a limited number of other organizations. It is inappropriate and inequitable to create a two-tiered system of campaign finance laws and First Amendment protections, one for the most powerful and influential and another for everyone else.
As of Friday afternoon, an additional 16 groups had added their names to the letter.
In a bid to gain more support for the exemption, the threshold requirement was lowered to groups with at least 500,000 members — a level that would bring in several other national advocacy groups, such as the Sierra Club, the Democratic aide noted. Action on the DISCLOSE Act is expected sometime next week.
— Rachel Rose Hartman is a politics writer for Yahoo! News.