Anytime Chuck Schumer proposes anything, suspicious minds are justified. The Disclosure Act, a brainchild of democrats Schumer and Chris Van Hollen , is another attempt to tip the scales of influence rather than correct them.
Like all legislation these days, the Disclosure Act is a bill clouded with legalese. Then again, legislation is often intended to be cloudy to mainstream America. That the Health care bill was 2100 pages of gobble dee gook was not entirely accidental. Ditto with the Disclosure Act. What Americans really need is disclosure about the Disclosure Act instead of propaganda and spin.
As is hardly a secret, Democrats are losing voter support like a lacerated artery and they want to staunch the bleeding as the mid term elections near. Rather than change the principles that got them into trouble, they believe that right now would be a great time to try and limit business campaign donors who are more prone to supporting Republicans. So they’ve crafted a bill to inhibit Republican leaning financial supporters under the guise of a Wall Street clean up. The bill would place greater requirements on only certain businesses that want to contribute money.
A lot of incumbent democrats are in trouble so they are looking to stack the deck. As written the Disclosure Act may not stand up constitutionally but the idea is to have it in effect for this election even if it’s tossed out later. The Democrats say the legislation is needed to control greedy businesses whose dubious investing and accounting methods hurt the economy. There is some truth to this. The business sectors they’re targeting however are those that might support a Republican return to power. They’ve exempted many of the blue ribbon winners of wasteful spending who engage in government programs and financially support democrats. Fannie and Freddie for example, spiraling out of control with wasteful spending and questionable ethics are exempt from the additional disclosure rules and restrictions being placed upon the private sector banks.
Beyond exempting Fannie and Freddie the bill would also exempt unions and those organizations enjoying collective bargaining agreements with the government. In other words, the special interests that pour millions into Democratic coffers. The true purpose of the legislation is not to clean up anything, but to tilt the scales for this election.
My opposition to the Disclosure Act is not so much the “free speech” argument that most Republicans echo. I support campaign finance reform. It’s when you start making exceptions so that you can bypass the actual purpose of the legislation that I part company.
Free speech is not harmless when that right is exclusively exercised as money to buy congressional and presidential influence. With a lobbying industry expected to spend over 3.7 billion dollars for this midterm and 5.5 billion when the oval office is in play, it’s obvious that “objectivity” being purchased. Almost every bill crafted for the past 20 years has some special interest strings attached to it. More than anything else, that’s why this nation is over 14 trillion in debt with a Congress that pretends that it’s wisely and prudently spending. The open bribing and dealing to get the Health Care bill passed was both sobering and frightening.
We ought not be able to unduly influence a party or a candidate by stuffing their pockets with money and freebies. Basic freedom is at risk. The truth is, we’re beyond mere influence. Pay to play has stymied objective and constitutional government practically out of existence. A congressman’s job should not be consumed almost twelve months a year with quota’s of campaign money to raise for the party leaders. That’s exactly how government now works. Everybody knows it even though politicians don’t admit it.
The Disclose Act is in fact a bad bill because it’s meant to corrupt the system further rather than correct it. It’s the same problem with virtually every reform bill that Congress generates. They tilt the scales by design.
Do I oppose the Disclose Act because it goes too far? No. I oppose it because it doesn’t go far enough.
About the author
William Burton wrote 26 articles on this blog.
A political junkie with a home spun view of politics, passionately conservative. Published writer (short stories, political essays, poems), and public speaker. Profiled in, "The Ridiculous Race" by Steve Heely.
Disclosure Act Needs Disclosure
Anytime Chuck Schumer proposes anything, suspicious minds are justified. The Disclosure Act, a brainchild of democrats Schumer and Chris Van Hollen , is another attempt to tip the scales of influence rather than correct them.
Like all legislation these days, the Disclosure Act is a bill clouded with legalese. Then again, legislation is often intended to be cloudy to mainstream America. That the Health care bill was 2100 pages of gobble dee gook was not entirely accidental. Ditto with the Disclosure Act. What Americans really need is disclosure about the Disclosure Act instead of propaganda and spin.
As is hardly a secret, Democrats are losing voter support like a lacerated artery and they want to staunch the bleeding as the mid term elections near. Rather than change the principles that got them into trouble, they believe that right now would be a great time to try and limit business campaign donors who are more prone to supporting Republicans. So they’ve crafted a bill to inhibit Republican leaning financial supporters under the guise of a Wall Street clean up. The bill would place greater requirements on only certain businesses that want to contribute money.
A lot of incumbent democrats are in trouble so they are looking to stack the deck. As written the Disclosure Act may not stand up constitutionally but the idea is to have it in effect for this election even if it’s tossed out later. The Democrats say the legislation is needed to control greedy businesses whose dubious investing and accounting methods hurt the economy. There is some truth to this. The business sectors they’re targeting however are those that might support a Republican return to power. They’ve exempted many of the blue ribbon winners of wasteful spending who engage in government programs and financially support democrats. Fannie and Freddie for example, spiraling out of control with wasteful spending and questionable ethics are exempt from the additional disclosure rules and restrictions being placed upon the private sector banks.
Beyond exempting Fannie and Freddie the bill would also exempt unions and those organizations enjoying collective bargaining agreements with the government. In other words, the special interests that pour millions into Democratic coffers. The true purpose of the legislation is not to clean up anything, but to tilt the scales for this election.
My opposition to the Disclosure Act is not so much the “free speech” argument that most Republicans echo. I support campaign finance reform. It’s when you start making exceptions so that you can bypass the actual purpose of the legislation that I part company.
Free speech is not harmless when that right is exclusively exercised as money to buy congressional and presidential influence. With a lobbying industry expected to spend over 3.7 billion dollars for this midterm and 5.5 billion when the oval office is in play, it’s obvious that “objectivity” being purchased. Almost every bill crafted for the past 20 years has some special interest strings attached to it. More than anything else, that’s why this nation is over 14 trillion in debt with a Congress that pretends that it’s wisely and prudently spending. The open bribing and dealing to get the Health Care bill passed was both sobering and frightening.
We ought not be able to unduly influence a party or a candidate by stuffing their pockets with money and freebies. Basic freedom is at risk. The truth is, we’re beyond mere influence. Pay to play has stymied objective and constitutional government practically out of existence. A congressman’s job should not be consumed almost twelve months a year with quota’s of campaign money to raise for the party leaders. That’s exactly how government now works. Everybody knows it even though politicians don’t admit it.
The Disclose Act is in fact a bad bill because it’s meant to corrupt the system further rather than correct it. It’s the same problem with virtually every reform bill that Congress generates. They tilt the scales by design.
Do I oppose the Disclose Act because it goes too far? No. I oppose it because it doesn’t go far enough.
About the author
William Burton wrote 26 articles on this blog.
A political junkie with a home spun view of politics, passionately conservative. Published writer (short stories, political essays, poems), and public speaker. Profiled in, "The Ridiculous Race" by Steve Heely.
Shortlink: