Monday, 28 June 2010

U.S. Chamber Official: Disclose Act 'Shreds' Constitution! The Disclose Act that House Democrats passed Thursday would "shred" the U.S. Constitution and represents a "blatant partisan maneuver to protect their incumbency," according to U.S. Chamber of Commerce Executive Vice President R. Bruce Josten.
In an exclusive interview with Newsmax.TV, Josten says the Disclose Act, which passed by a 219 to 206 margin, reveals just how much Democrats fear the nation's rising anti-incumbent fervor.
"I think it's clear what's going on here," says Josten. "The House Democratic majority and the Senate Democratic majority in Congress are clearly trying to tilt the playing field in the middle of the game, racing and rushing to do it."
Only two Republicans voted for the act: Rep. Anh "Joseph" Cao of Louisiana and Rep. Michael Castle of Delaware.
Just last week it looked like the bill was in trouble due to a controversial "carve out," or exception, granted to the National Rifle Association excluding it from the bill's provisions. But the bill was resuscitated in part thanks to a strong endorsement from the White House.
The administration declared Monday that the Disclose Act "takes great strides to hold corporations who participate in the Nation's elections accountable to the American people. As this is a matter of urgent importance, the administration urges prompt passage of the Disclose Act."
But Josten says the act would heavily restrict the rights of more than 100,000 associations nationwide to run ads expressing their political views.
Groups opposing the measure span the political continuum, including the ACLU, the Sierra Club, PIRG (the federation of state public interest research groups), the chamber and many others.
The chamber recently called the bill a "desperate attempt" by Democrats to grab a political advantage in the midterm elections.
The act requires companies and associations to submit a mountain of paperwork to the Federal Election Commission if they want to run an ad.
Some companies - those that receive substantial government contracts or took TARP bailouts - would be altogether banned from spending money on election advertising.
It also bans any company with more than 20 percent foreign ownership from advertising, which means international companies that employs tens of thousands of U.S. citizens, which also attract substantial foreign investment, could no longer pay for U.S. campaign-related advertising.
CEOs who are major donors would have to appear on in ads to notify the public of their involvement. The top donor to the advertising organization would be required to appear in the commercial to explain their role as well.
Finally, a TV ad would have to list the top five funders to the organization. The disclaimers alone would preclude the possibility of a 15-second advertisement.
Josten and other business leaders charge the act's onerous provisions are obviously designed to dissuade the business community from exercising its First Amendment rights.
Another reason the bill's intentions are suspect: Its principal author is Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Md.
Van Hollen's primary job, as chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, is to get Democrats elected to Congress.
"I don't think there's any doubt," Josten tells Newsmax in the exclusive interview. "Mr. Van Hollen made it very clear that the Democrats are 'anxious,' to quote him, to pass this as fast as they can before the elections clearly to protect their incumbent majority, because the anti-incumbent mood across the country is probably the highest since 1994."
Adds Josten: "The first paragraph in the Constitution states declaratively that Congress shall pass no law abridging freedom of the speech," Josten says. "We just had a Congress shred that part of the Constitution. They have now created in effect a multitiered law with respect to free speech.
Josten says the measure also gives preferential treatment to labor unions.
"Organized labor, which notably was the single largest political spender in the 2008 election, some $420 million, who just in the past three weeks has announced their intention to spend $150 million minimally in this election to protect 'incumbency,' to quote them, they are carved out of the bill, no effect on them, no real disclosure, no real reporting requirements required of them," he tells Newsmax.
According to Josten, every other bipartisan campaign reform dating back to 1943 has contained a provision requiring an expedited Supreme Court review, to ensure no infringement of the First Amendment. But not this one.
"This piece of legislation in fact precludes expedited Supreme Court review interestingly enough," Josten tells Newsmax. "It forces any potential challenger to the litigation to go through a district court process to be heard. And then ultimately, maybe three or four years from today ... you get your hearing before the Supreme Court. They are clearly trying to cut off any opportunity to raise the constitutional issues that this bill tampers with, and I say in fact begins to shred."
Whether the act becomes law now depends on whether Democrats can muster enough votes to bring it to the floor of the Senate. So far, GOP sources tell Newsmax, the 41 Republican votes needed to block the bill are holding firm. But Democrats are expected to mount a serious effort to encourage a defection.
The Disclose Act stems from Citizens United vs. FEC, the U.S. Supreme Court decision that struck down McCain-Feingold campaign-finance regulations that limited the rights of companies and associations to run political advertising.
The Supreme Court ruled such restrictions are an unconstitutional abridgment of the First Amendment's guarantees of free speech.
In his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama publicly scolded the Supreme Court for that decision. He said the ruling would "open the floodgates for special interests - including foreign corporations - to spend without limit in our elections," and urged Congress "to pass a bill that helps to right this wrong."
Calling All Veterans, Families Of Veterans
Special Tea Party Just For You!
The Tea Party Guard Is Growing In Leaps And Bounds!
Patriots are stepping up and taking the 2911 pledge everyday!
"Frankly, The Tea Party must have a core backbone of stalwart and vigilant Guardians, insuring the existence of the greatest movement since 1773." Dale Robertson - President of Tea Party/TeaParty.org
"To be honest with you, America is facing a lengthy and difficult fight for survival. We must prepare now for an extended campaign lead by men and women with intestinal fortitude, all others will fade."
911 awaken America to the fact that many are planning the demise of our beloved NATION by any means. The tragedy is some of those 911 forces are domestic, functioning within our borders and even filling our elected offices.
As you probably know, all too often the surge of protests subsides, the steam dissipates and the movement fizzles, the result is, the liberal socialists win, this will happen unless PATRIOTS draw the line and make an all out effort to guard our values which keep us great!
ObamA-nesty is right around the corner and picking up speed!
"Once again Obama and his socialist cabal will betray the American people. His putsch is quickly gaining steam as the doomed Liberals are beginning to see a ray of hope! If Obama can pull off his pre-election coup d'etat, then millions of illegal aliens will rush the voting booths guaranteeing the re-election of the well funded Obama-Reich." Dale Robertson - Founder/President Tea Party/TeaParty.org
Fox: Obama May Bypass Congress to Let Illegals Stay! The Obama administration has been holding behind-the-scenes talks to determine whether the Department of Homeland Security can unilaterally grant legal status on a mass basis to illegal immigrants, according to Fox News.
Tell Washington - NO AMNESTY!
The source for this bombshell - which could ignite a national uproar given that a majority supports tougher laws against illegals - is an unidentified former Bush administration official who spoke with at least three people involved in those talks.
The issue was raised publicly by eight Republican senators who wrote to the White House on Monday to complain that they had heard the administration was readying a "Plan B" in case a comprehensive immigration reform bill cannot win enough support to clear Congress, according to Fox.
The White House would not confirm or deny the claim. But the former Bush official said the discussions are real.
"The administration at the very minimum is studying legal ways to legalize people without having to go through any congressional debate about it," the source said, calling the senators' claim credible. "Whether somebody pulls the trigger on that, that's another issue."
The senators - Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Orrin Hatch, R-Utah; David Vitter, R-La.; Jim Bunning, R-Ky.; Saxby Chambliss, Ga.; Johnny Isakson, R-Ga.; James Inhofe, R-Okla.; and Thad Cochran, R-Miss. - claimed in their letter that the administration was looking at extending what is known as deferred action or parole to millions of illegal aliens in the United States.
One Of Millions Of Leaders!

Posted by Britannia Radio at 07:01