Democrats move to undercut Citizens United ruling (and a Rino Senate candidate is onboard)

Politico.com ^ | 4/24/10

[NormsRevenge]

In the coming week, Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and Rep. Mike Castle (R-Del.) plan to unveil legislation to close campaign-finance loopholes opened by the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision. The legislation was written in consultation with the White House. Here are details that have been circulated to Democratic congressional staffers, and were obtained by POLITICO:

The DISCLOSE Act:

Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections Act

The Response to Citizens United

The Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision on January 21 (Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission), overturned decades of campaign finance law and policy, and will now allow special interest money to overwhelm our system and corrode our democracy. We cannot sit by and watch this money flood our system.

On February 11, Senator Schumer and Congressman Van Hollen released a legislative framework that outlined how we can respond to this decision, and they have been working on the legislation since then. Next week, Senator Schumer will be introducing The Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections Act (or “The DISCLOSE Act”), which will rein in the increased influence of special interest money in our federal elections that this decision will unleash. The House companion will be led by Reps. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) and Mike Castle (R-DE). Below is an outline of the proposal:

[NormsRevenge]

just closing some loopholes, Folks. nothing to see here.

[pyx]

Yet more attempts by Schumer and gang to legislatively destroy Free Political Speech and criticism. More protection of incumbents.

[okie01]

In other words, DISCLOSE will force full and immediate disclosure on corporations -- while allowing unions and 527's to make unlimited contributions without full disclosure.

Moreover, no corporation that is a government contractor will be allowed to have any voice whatsoever in the political process. Even while special interests and non-profits who receive government grants will be allowed to make unlimited (and undisclosed) contributions.

What we have heah...is just another liberal attack on the First Amendment.

[nolongerademocrat]

How Do You Like Me Now? Barry’s Song
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4ZxOuDJS7g&feature=pyv&ad=4504026474&kw=toby%20keith

[apillar]

And, according to most legal scholars, it will be smacked down by the Supreme Court again. The Supreme Court ruling was very broad and based on 1st amendment free speech grounds, not some technicality that can be easily corrected by the legislative branch like their ruling on pay discrimination based on sex. The democrats are trying to accomplish the same goals by different means, but the end result will still be interpreted by SCOTUS as chilling free speech rights of corporations.

[EDINVA]

They never figure out that every time they write up new legislation, it creates more loopholes and problems than the pre-existing condition they are theoretically ‘curing.’

[Bob Buchholz]

Exactly what part of “Congress shall make no law...” do they have difficulty understanding?

[Hartlyboy]

I’m really wondering if it is worth it to elect Castle to the Senate from here in Delaware or just let the Democrats keep it. We’ll never know the difference except when they count up R’s and D’s.

[pray4liberty]

Vote for Christine O’Donnell, and we will be rid of THAT ASS (Castle)!