Subscribe to Common Dreams News Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Disclosing the Meekness of the "DISCLOSE" Bill
Hold onto your socks, because - Ta-Dah - here is the Democrats' response: The DISCLOSE Act! Or, by it's full moniker, the "Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light On Spending in Elections" Act. (Gosh, couldn't they have come up with a more cumbersome title?)
More to the point, couldn't they have come up with a more proportional response to the Court's enthronement of corporate money over our people's democratic authority? The decision was nothing less than a black-robed coup by five men - Sam Alito, Anthony Kennedy, John Roberts, Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas - who abused their positions on the bench to pervert our First Amendment.
They arbitrarily declared that self-serving, bloodless corporate entities have political "rights" that make them superior to people. The 5-4 ruling by these extremist, right-wing corporatists in the Citizens United case is the nuclear bomb of politics, for it allows any and every corporation - from Wall Street to Walmart - to pour unlimited sums of money directly from its massive treasuries into campaigns to elect or defeat its chosen ones.
And the Democrats' response to this crass power grab - which literally legalizes the corporate purchase of our government - is a disclosure bill?
Yes. Though, in fairness, the Dems do insist that it is a "sweeping" disclosure bill. President Obama, who had publicly pledged in January to undo the court's anti-democratic decree, lauded the DISCLOSE proposal as the fulfillment of his pledge, calling it the "toughest ever disclosure requirements for election-related spending by big-oil corporations, Wall Street and other special interests, so the American people can follow the money and see clearly which special interests are funding political campaign activity and trying to buy representation in our government."
Well, yes, but it's still only a disclosure bill.
The bill's stated purpose is to help voters know who (or what) is behind paid political ads. Corporations and their front groups must put the names of an ad's sponsors on the screen, and the top executive of the corporation or group must appear on camera to "approve" the ad. All of this is good, of course, and long overdue, but this is not going to stop a tsunami of corporate money from swamping our elections. Corporations have packs of legal beagles already chewing loopholes in the bill so corporate sponsors can obscure their involvement.
Besides, even if the disclosure provisions are airtight, they actually sanction the corporate purchase of our democracy - it's OK to spend all you want, the bill effectively says, but you must disclose the thievery. That's like legalizing armed robbery, as long as the robbers wear nametags.
Where is the audacity, the boldness, to do what needs to be done? The proper response here can be expressed in one word: "No." Better yet, two words: "Hell, no!" In fact, this emphatic rejection of Citizens United is what the overwhelming majority of Americans want - 83 percent of the public (including 76 percent of Republicans) wants the ban on corporate election spending reinstated. The way to do this is through a constitutional amendment that directly reverses the court's perversity.
Democratic congressional leaders say they abandoned such direct and effective measures because they wanted to attract bipartisan support. Really? How'd that work out for them? Big surprise: Not a single Republican senator and only one House Republican signed on as a co-sponsor of DISCLOSE.
We can't let pusillanimous Democrats get away with this pathetic response to a historic wrong. The court can issue rulings, but We the People are the rulers. If Democrats won't stand up, we must - after all, it's our democracy that is being handed over to a corporate plutocracy.
To connect with grassroots efforts to overrule the court by passing a constitutional amendment, check out these groups: freespeechforpeople.org, dontgetrolled.com and movetoamend.org.




10 Comments so far
Show All"Democratic congressional leaders say they abandoned such direct and effective measures because they wanted to attract bipartisan support. Really? How'd that work out for them? Big surprise: Not a single Republican senator and only one House Republican signed on as a co-sponsor of DISCLOSE."
The Dems are just providing themselves cover with this excuse. In actuality, they are just as bought off by the multi-national corporations and banks.
This excuse is getting worn and tattered from heavy use by Obama and his cronies in congress
"If Democrats won't stand up, we must - after all, it's our democracy that is being handed over to a corporate plutocracy."
No, Jim, our democracy has been handed over to the political ruling elite a long time ago. And it ain't coming back.
Any way, who really gives a damn. The Constitution is a scrap of paper. Our rights never have been defended by our "elected" officials. Money talks and BS walks, Jim, so get walking.
NO the only solution is to tack away corporate
person hood
you cant bleed or be thrown in jail for crimes you do not have the same rights as a person
you should be considered property by law
The politicos do not 'disclose' their illicit love affairs, there 'little black books' filled with the names of high-dollar whores.....gee, just what we need: ANOTHER USELESS LAW
You are right-on, Jim! In all likelihood, the weak kneed Democrats don't really want their campaign funding diluted, so they can't mount a real call for any substantive action to be taken to overthrow the Supreme Court's ruling. The 1% that own virtually everything may wake up one day and realize that we of the 99% just won't be able to support them any longer if they keep gobbling up all the wealth.
"The bill's stated purpose is to help voters know who (or what) is behind paid political ads."
I am Exxon, and I approve this message.
Corporatocracy, enthroned.
I can see the religious rights disclosure statement, I am God and I approve this message! And there are a whole lot of weak minded idiots out there in Americaland who would believe it.
It's obvious the "Corpocrats" are not interested in restoring democracy. Obama just wants to be a good company co-manager, otherwise he would be displaying some real outrage and demanding the legislative correction of CU v. FEC.
Exxon for president in 1014! Walmart for VP.
Can you name one problem that the Democrats have dealt with head on? Every bit of legislation they have passed has either made problems worse or just nibbled at the edges.
They like to blame the GOP but the Democrats own everything. They make the rules and decide what legislation reaches the floor of both Houses. They have the ability to discipline members of their own Party and the Democratic VP has the deciding vote in the Senate.
They can pass good legislation but they don't want to. It's not a matter of idealogy, it's a matter of money. They want corporate money for their campaign coffers.
Never has there been such a squandered opportunity. There is nothing preventing them setting the nation back on track but their own greed and selfishness.