« Law Breaker Obama Using TAXPAYER DOLLARS to Get Equal Pay for ILLEGALS | Main | Hero Gov. Bobby Jindal Urges America Hating Obama: "Listen to the Federal Judge" »
June 25, 2010
House Passes DISCLOSE Act: Pro-Life/Grassroots Muzzle Bill Goes to Senate
House Invokes "Martial Law Rule" and Passes DISCLOSE ACT
House Passes DISCLOSE Act: Pro-Life/Grassroots Muzzle Bill Goes to Senate
Critics on both the left and the right say the act will disable grassroots political voices, including Tea Party movement
We are in a constitutional crisis on many levels but today the First Amendment right to free speech has been trampled by Democrats who are hanging on with their fingernails.
The Democrat-controlled House has pulled another fast one in a blatant, desperate attempt to shut down the voices of opposition prior to this November’s elections.
The House has just voted to criminalize speech by grassroots groups. There are criminal provisions in this bill which will can put people in jail for opposing points of view. Let me repeat, there are criminal provisions in this bill which include JAIL for expressing political views and not following the byzantine reporting rules which noone will be able to understand.
The so-called “Disclose Act” is about anything BUT disclosure; it is about placing impossible, confusing and punishing controls on grassroots organizations such as the Tea Party movement, and other conservative groups.
The Supreme Court ruled last year on a case which allowed corporations the same right to take out ads for political candidates as individuals and as you recall, President Obama “called out” Supreme Court justices on their decision to their faces during his state of the union speech this year. He is a Chicago thugga who is attempting to break down every legal and society safety net we have.
You can read below that the Disclose Act was passed by only one vote…with the help of two God-forsaken House Republicans, Rep. Mike Castle of Delaware ( who voted for cap and trade and TARP) , and the Louisiana weenie Rep. “Anh” Cao (R-La.), who also was a critical swing vote on health care reform in December.
If there is any doubt in your mind that this bill was passed to keep Republicans from getting elected this fall….listen to this video of Rep. Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) who blatantly said from the House floor today exactly what the agenda is.
This bill now goes to the Senate and it must absolutely be stopped or there may be no chance to win back the Congress this fall.
The mainstream media in this country are not going to be covering this story widely because it doesn’t affect them and they are in the bag for the Democrats. Thus, do NOT be lulled into thinking this is not a “big deal” because you aren’t hearing about it on the networks….you will NOT.
This is happening quickly. There is literally a counter-revolution going on right now to cause chaos in the next few months, to scare these groups into silence for fear of being prosecuted. This could not be more serious.
Call your senator to filibuster and stop this bill. Vote these House members out, God help us, if we have a chance.
.
With a political audacity that has become characteristic since the caustic health care debates, the Democrat-controlled House of Representatives voted Thursday to approve a campaign finance disclosure bill that critics on both the left and the right say will disable grassroots political voices – including the nascent “Tea Party” movement that has been looking to sweep away liberal incumbents in November.
At approximately 4:30 p.m., the House voted 219-206 to approve H.R. 5175, the “Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections (DISCLOSE) Act,” which the National Right to Life Committee, other pro-life, pro-family groups, and even the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have condemned as a threat to free speech and free participation in the political process.
The Act would force grassroots organizations to release the names of donors and members of their organizations into a publicly searchable database maintained by the Federal Elections Commission (FEC). Opponents of the bill say it would frustrate the ability of grassroots entities to communicate effectively with the public about public policy.
“This is a blatant attack on our organizations, members, and donors,” said Douglas Johnson, NRLC’s Legislative Director. “National Right to Life will do everything possible to keep this bill from coming out of the Senate.”
Johnson said that stopping the Senate from approving its version (S 3295) of the DISCLOSE Act is “a jump ball.”
“I think we have to take it very seriously. There are already 50 cosponsors of the bill in the Senate. But as you know, the Senate has different rules, and we will certainly do our best to persuade any Senator who will listen that this bill is unconstitutional, unprincipled, and nakedly partisan.”
Should the Senate approve the DISCLOSE Act, and should it be signed into law by President Barack Obama, the act would take effect in 30 days, even if the Federal Elections Commission has not yet crafted new guidelines – just in time for the mid-term elections in November.
During the one-hour debate on the bill, Rep. Dan Lungren expressed outrage that unlike every other campaign finance bill passed by the House, this bill has no provision for expedited judicial review. He said the lack of such a provision makes it clear the DISCLOSE Act is meant to influence the outcome of the 2010 midterm elections.
He also expressed frustration that so little time was given the House to debate a matter impacting Americans’ First Amendment rights.
“We have spent 40 hours in this Congress naming post offices. Can’t we spend a little time protecting the Constitution of the United States?” Lungren exclaimed.
“We’re talking about political speech: the essence of the First Amendment.”
Under the bill, all groups subject to the law’s requirements – including most 501(c)4, 501(c)5, 501(c)6, and 527 groups – would have to list all donors of $600 or more with the Federal Election Commission (FEC). Groups must also post a hyperlink on their website to the FEC, where a list of the names of their donors can be accessed.
But the DISCLOSE Act exempts large 501(c)4 groups – like the 4 million strong NRA and 750,000 member Sierra Club – from having to report their donors if they have at least 500,000 members, over 10 years of existence, chapters in all 50 states, and receive no more than 15% of total contributions from corporations.
Unions also have significant exemptions. Most union dues are under $600 dollars, and so do not have to be reported. Union to union transfers of money also do not have to be disclosed.
In a letter to Congress, the ACLU noted the irony that a bill ostensibly dedicated to uprooting corruption in the political process would exempt entrenched “mainstream” political interests from its reporting requirements, while “smaller organizations and those just starting out would have to disclose their donors in order to engage in political speech.”
“Those groups not challenging the status quo would be protected; those challenging the status quo would be suppressed,” they concluded.
House members had virtually no time to read the final version of the bill approved yesterday behind closed doors by the House Rules Committee. Instead of waiting for Congressmen and their staff to analyze the final bill, the Democrat leadership forced through today’s vote today by invoking a “Martial Law Rule.”
The Martial Law Rule dispenses with a longstanding House rule (Rule XIII(6)(a)) intended to give U.S. Representatives and the public enough time to understand significant legislation. The rule requires that there be at least one day between a bill’s unveiling and the House floor vote, and can only be suspended if two-thirds of the House agrees – but the Martial Law Rule dispenses with that process entirely.
Critics on both the left and the right have denounced the tactic, saying it empowers a party’s leadership to act in an authoritarian manner and endangers democratic self-government by forcing members to vote blind on measures demanded by their leaders.
The bill requires that every time an organization runs a campaign ad, its CEO must appear in the ad and twice state his name and the organization’s name. The top five funders of the organization behind the ad – even if they had nothing to do with the ad’s funding – must also have their names listed in the ad.
In addition, the most “significant” donor to the organization must list his name, rank, and organization three times in the ad.
Critics of the bill say that the disclaimers effectively devour valuable airtime bought by these groups that would otherwise be used to inform voters about a candidate’s record.
“We’re getting a little silly here. We’re talking about making disclaimers that are going to take the entire time of a commercial,” stated Rep. Lungren during debate.
He also expressed grave concern that individuals – with names and addresses publicly available – would be subject to reprisals for making a political statement. He pointed to the situation in California, where supporters of Proposition 8 have been victims of reprisals by homosexualist activists.
“We are chilling speech already, and now we are getting into direct intimidation by requiring the residence of people living there,” he said.
Other affected entities under the bill will likely include vocal liberal and conservative groups that communicate through the internet. While traditional media organizations like newspapers and television stations are exempt from the bill, bloggers, the vanguard of the “new media,” are not.
How representatives voted – click here.
Contact information for the U.S. House of Representatives - click here.
Contact information for the U.S. Senate - click here.
.
NRA Not Concerned with Constitution As A Whole only one issue the 2nd Amendment
NRA-ILA GRASSROOTS ALERT
Vol. 17, No. 24 06/18/10
Statement From NRA-ILA Executive Director
Chris W. Cox On H.R. 5175, The “DISCLOSE Act”
We believe that any restriction on political speech is repugnant. But some of our critics believe we should put the Second Amendment at risk over a First Amendment principle to protect other organizations. That’s easy to say — unless you have a sworn duty to protect the Second Amendment above all else, as I do.
Rather than focusing on opposing this bill, some have encouraged people to blame the NRA for this Congress’s unconstitutional attack on free speech. That’s a shame. If you oppose this bill, I hope you will contact your Member of Congress and Senators so they can hear from you.
Statement From David Keene, NRA First
Vice-President On H.R. 5175, The “DISCLOSE Act”
NRA has one major mission . to defend the right of its members and all Americans to Keep & Bear Arms as guaranteed by the Second Amendment. Therefore, the NRA served notice on Congress that since the act threatened our very existence, we were prepared to do anything and everything that might be required to defeat it unless it was changed so that we could continue to represent the views of our members in the public arena. The letter, sent on May 26, was public. The NRA did not engage in back room shenanigans, but told Congressional leaders quite clearly that we would do whatever we needed to do to protect the rights of our members and our ability to defend the Second Amendment.
Last week Democratic leadership in the House capitulated by agreeing to exempt the NRA from the act — not in return for NRA support, but to avoid a political war that might cost them even more seats this fall.
.
NRA exemption shows campaign disclosure bill's cynical, fatal flaws
By Cleta Mitchell ...(The writer is a partner at Foley & Lardner who works in campaign finance law and is a member of the NRA's board of directors.)
Here's just an excerpt:
The cynical decision this week by House Democrats to exempt the National Rifle Association from the latest campaign finance regulatory scheme is itself a public disclosure. It reveals the true purpose of the perversely named Disclose Act (H.R. 5175): namely, to silence congressional critics in the 2010 elections.
The NRA "carve-out" reaffirms the wisdom of the First Amendment's precise language: "Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech."
Congress can't help itself. Since 1798, with the Alien and Sedition Acts, incumbent politicians have yearned for legal duct tape for their opponents' mouths. The Disclose Act is a doozy of a muzzle.
For its part, the NRA -- on whose board of directors I serve -- rather than holding steadfastly to its historic principles of defending the Constitution and continuing its noble fight against government regulation of political speech instead opted for a political deal borne of self-interest in exchange for "neutrality" from the legislation's requirements. In doing so, the NRA has, sadly, affirmed the notion held by congressional Democrats (and some Republicans), liberal activists, the media establishment and, at least for now, a minority on the Supreme Court that First Amendment protections are subject to negotiation. The Second Amendment surely cannot be far behind.
Receiving less attention than the NRA "carve-out" but no less cynical is the bill's sop to organized labor: Aggregate contributions of $600 or more would be disclosed. Why start at $600? Why not $200 or, say, $500? Because most union members' dues aggregate less than $600 in a calendar year and thus members' contributions to labor's campaign-related spending wouldn't need to be disclosed . . . even to the union members whose dues are spent for political purposes.
.
Mark Levin had Cleta Mitchell on his show last night.l....discussing the Disclose Act threatens the First Amendment
.
Wild Thing's comment......
I feel sick. Really. Does it bother anyone else that we are PAYING THESE PIECES OF GARBAGE to screw us? OMG I'm pissed.
I for one will never stop speaking out.
We up the pressure on our Senators until HR 5175 is dead, dead, dead!!!
Posted by Wild Thing at June 25, 2010 06:55 AM
Comments
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
As omoron calls our Constitution and the "Bill of Negative Rights", "it says nothing of what the Government can do to you", then he refrased that statement because it was too close to the truth. That truth is to take away as many rights as possible in order to fundamentally change the America and push it further toward a Socialist/Communist form of government.
Now we all know this is in direct violation of the oath these Elitists morons take: To uphold, defend the Constitution. What kind of feasance is this.
Example: A company hires a catering company to provide drinks and food for a retirement party. If the catering company doesn't show up, it's considered nonfeasance. If the catering company shows up but only provides drinks (and not the food, which was also paid for), it's considered misfeasance. If the catering company accepts a bribe from its client's competitor to sautée the meat in bat guano, thereby giving those present food poisoning, it's considered malfeasance.
What we got here is a congress run amok and trying to feed us Bat Shit and at the same time telling us that it is for our own good. It doesn't matter that we will get food poisoning, just do as they say.
They are telling us all men are equal, but with the exception if you are a Right Wing Tea Party and have a contrary view to the accepted Elitist view of how the Communist Government should run.
These people are all guilty of violating their oath of office ans should be removed or jailed immediately.
Posted by: Mark at June 25, 2010 08:59 AM
I will be contacting both of my communist senators (Feinstein/Boxer) but both are useless douchebags and it will be a waste of time, but I'm driven to do it anyway.
As every passes and we continue to loose our liberties, I am convinced that eventually the people will revolt and forcefully remove the excrement controlling our government and driving our country into oblivion.
We need a leader in the event O'Shit Mouth takes over the internets and cuts off communication. Does anyone know how to contact Jon Voight? He would be perfect.
WOLVERINES!
Posted by: Eddie (A libs worst nightmare) at June 25, 2010 09:47 AM
I won't be renewing my NRA membership when it expires this December. Any member of the NRA who is a Veteran or Active Duty Military should be outraged that the NRA threw the rest of the Constitution under the bus to exempt themselves. We swore an oath to protect and defend the whole Constitution, not just the 2nd Amendment of the Bill of Rights. You protect one right by defending all rights. If the NRA thinks they've garnered friends on the left by doing this, they're dead wrong.
-First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
-Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.
-Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.
-Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me
Posted by: BobF at June 25, 2010 09:55 AM
As the RINOs and other others sucking-up to the left/libtard agenda, like feeding their buddies to an aligator hoping it'll eat them last, will find: they loose the support of their buddies and the aligator will still eat them.
Posted by: Anonymous at June 25, 2010 10:41 AM
Hi Eddie,
My two Senators SChUMer and Gillibrand are also a couple of douchebags and my so called Representative Scott Murphy voted yea on this POS bill. I'm going to put a post up on my local sites about this bill and about Scott Murphy who has a grade of F on votes upholding the Constitution. Thanks for posting this WT, I'll link back so readers can hit your post.
Posted by: Bob A at June 25, 2010 11:05 AM
Thanks Bob A..good to see you too.
Thank you so much all of you. We are living through some unreal times, I wish they weren't so real and we could just wake up from all of this.
Posted by: Wild Thing at June 26, 2010 03:09 AM
