Obama’s DISCLOSE Act end run 

He lost in Congress. He lost in the Supreme Court. He lost at the FEC. Now he is attempting to rewrite the campaign laws by fiat. The Heritage Foundation’s Hans von Spakovsky reports:

An impeccable source has provided me with a copy of a draft Executive Order that the White House is apparently circulating for comments from several government agencies. Titled “Disclosure of Political Spending By Government Contractors,” it appears to be an attempt by the Obama administration to implement — by executive fiat — portions of the DISCLOSE Act.
...
The draft Executive Order says it is intended to “increase transparency and accountability,” an interesting claim given the fact that federal contractors are already completely barred by 2 U.S.C. § 441c from making:

Any contribution of money or other things of value, or to promise expressly or impliedly to make any such contribution to any political party, committee, or candidate for public office or to any person for any political purpose or use.

Yet this proposed Executive Order would require government contractors to disclose:

(a) All contributions or expenditures to or on behalf of federal candidates, parties or party committees made by the bidding entity, its directors or officers, or any affiliates or subsidiaries within its control.

(b) Any contributions made to third party entities with the intention or reasonable expectation that parties would use those contributions to make independent expenditures or electioneering communications.

The problem is that this will require companies to delve into the personal political activities of their officers and directors — and require them to report political contributions those employees have made, not out of corporate funds (which is illegal), but out of their personal funds.

And note that these disclosure requirements will only apply to companies that make bids on government contracts. Federal employee unions that negotiate contracts for their members worth many times the value of some government contracts are not affected by this order. Neither are the recipients of hundreds of millions of dollars of federal grants.

The important thing to remember is that the DISCLOSE Act never had anything to do with increasing “transparency” or “accountability.” It was always about raising the cost of speech for the left’s political adversaries. Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA) admitted as much during the committee markup last year when he said that he wished it were possible to ban all outside groups from participating in elections and that he hoped the DISCLOSE Act would do just that.

That is exactly what the Obama administration is trying to do unilaterally now.

About The Author

Conn Carroll

Pin It
Favorite

Latest in Nation

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

Videos

Related to Nation

© 2014 The San Francisco Examiner

Website powered by Foundation