Sign Up | Log In
REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS
California's "Disclose Act"
Thursday, March 28, 2013 11:19 AM
NIKI2
Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...
Quote:About AB 1648, California DISCLOSE Act Change the Big Money Game with True Transparency AB 1648, the California DISCLOSE Act, would fight back against unlimited hidden spending on campaigns by letting voters know who REALLY is paying for political ads — on the ads themselves. Authored by Assemblymember Julia Brownley and sponsored by the California Clean Money Campaign, AB 1648 would amend the Political Reform Act of 1974. California Disclose Act Provisions: Requires the three largest funders of political ads to be clearly identified with their names and logos — on the ads themselves, so voters know who is actually paying for them. Applies to all television ads, radio ads, print ads, mass mailers, and websites for or against state and local ballot measures, and to independent expenditures for and against candidates. It applies whether ads are paid for by corporations, unions, or millionaires. Tells voters where to find the details — Requires ads to list a website with greater disclosure and a link to the Secretary of State's website Will "pierce through" hidden funders by requiring political ads to report their three largest actual contributors, no matter how many committees or groups their contributions pass through. Applies to slate mailers: Requires slate mailers to show when ads are paid for by independent expenditures. Requires candidates to appear and say they "approve this message", just like federal candidates. http://www.caclean.org/progress/ab1148.php] We tried it before, January of last year, and it missed by only two votes. Hopefully this time it'll go through. We can't change the atrocity that is Citizens United nationally, but we can fight it here until someone comes to their senses and DOES change it federally. As part of that, this is happening:Quote:California Officials Turn Up The Heat On Secretive 'Dark Money' Groups California officials have widened an investigation into the source of $11 million that was mysteriously funneled by a few nonprofit groups in 2012 to sway two ballot measures in the state, The Huffington Post has learned. The state’s election watchdog agency, the Fair Political Practices Commission, which launched the inquiry last November, is working closely with the California attorney general’s office, according to a person familiar with the matter. They have issued about a dozen new subpoenas to individuals and organizations for financial records, according to the person, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the probe. The latest round of subpoenas represents a major development in the investigation and comes on top of several subpoenas previously sent to the California PAC that spent the $11 million and three nonprofit groups that are not required to reveal their donors, including one with ties to the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. The inquiry was sparked because of a California law requiring contributors to state initiatives be publicly disclosed. Investigators are reviewing how these nonprofit groups were used to shield the identities of donors and attempting to trace the original funding sources. Gary Winuk, a spokesman for the commission, declined to comment, as did Lynda Gledhill, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office. California’s decision to follow this murky million-dollar money trail is one of several recent legal actions around the country aimed at increasing transparency and curbing potential abuses of so-called dark money by politically active, tax-exempt groups known as 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. More at http://ballot.org/news/california-officials-turn-heat-secretive-dark-money-groups And once DISCLOSE passes, we'll turn up the heat even HIGHER! And we're not alone:Quote:The New York attorney general last December issued new and tougher rules that require the disclosure of donors by social welfare groups that spend more than $10,000 to influence state and local races there. In January, a Montana court ruled against a dark money group that had been aggressively fighting state disclosure laws about its spending in 2008 in Montana and Colorado state elections. These legal actions have come as some campaign watchdogs and former Internal Revenue Service officials have voiced concerns about the adequacy of IRS oversight of these tax-exempt groups. Congressional interest in the political activities of dark money groups has also been mounting. Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, said in early March that he intends to hold hearings this year to “look into the failure of the IRS to enforce our tax laws and stem the flood of hundreds of millions of secret dollars flowing into our elections, eroding public confidence in our democracy.” Federal court rulings in 2010, including the Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United case, paved the way for outside groups to raise unlimited sums from corporations, unions and individuals to directly back candidates. Since then, dark money groups have poured hundreds of millions into federal and state elections. These groups include the GOP-allied Crossroads GPS, which was co-founded by Republican strategist Karl Rove, and the Democratic-allied Priorities USA, which was founded by two former White House aides. Both groups, which like other social welfare outfits are supposed to operate separately from candidates' campaign committees, have drawn fire from campaign finance watchdogs for their hefty amounts of political spending. “The IRS has always given a little bit of attention to these groups, but not as much as called for,” former IRS Commissioner Sheldon Cohen told The Huffington Post. “The spending by some (c)(4) groups has pushed the envelope in terms of political activities.” Cohen added that the problem of increased political spending by tax-exempt groups “has burgeoned,” while noting that budget constraints have often crimped the IRS's regulatory capacities. Same Meanwhile, back in our little corner of the world:Quote:The California investigation into the mysterious origins of the $11 million spent on two ballot initiatives there seems to be generating the most heat. When it launched the probe in November, the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission called the donation the “largest contribution ever disclosed as campaign money laundering in California history.” The controversy erupted shortly before Election Day when a state PAC, the Small Business Action Committee, reported spending $11 million on two ballot measures. One was aimed at fighting a tax hike backed by Gov. Jerry Brown (D), while the other would have curbed union spending on elections. In its reports to the state, the PAC revealed only that the funds had arrived in mid-October from Americans for Responsible Leadership, a 2-year-old dark money outfit based in Arizona that had never before been involved in California elections. Seeking to pierce the funding veil, the commission took the matter to the California Supreme Court, which ordered Americans for Responsible Leadership to disclose where the funds originated. In response, the Arizona group pointed the finger at a Virginia-based nonprofit, Americans for Job Security -- which spent close to $16 million to help GOP candidates including Mitt Romney last year -- as the source. In a further twist, AJS had channeled the funds to a group called the Center to Protect Patient Rights, which is run by Sean Noble, a well-known Koch operative. The center then handed the $11 million over to Americans for Responsible Leadership. (Despite their under-the-radar spending drive, the groups failed to block the ballot measure hiking taxes, or to pass the one curbing union spending.) Same, and more can be read there. I love that last part...money didn't win, underhanded as it was! I don't want ANYONE, right, left or center, buying my elections (even when they CAN here); we'll fight Citizens United down eventually, wait and see. And yeah, I've been working on it...see, CTTS, rather than do NOTHING and run away and pretend I'm better than others, I WILL vote for the candidate I think will do the most good, or least harm if that's the only choice, and THEN I'll keep working to make things better. Anything less is pure, self-serving cowardice, in my humble opinion.
Quote:California Officials Turn Up The Heat On Secretive 'Dark Money' Groups California officials have widened an investigation into the source of $11 million that was mysteriously funneled by a few nonprofit groups in 2012 to sway two ballot measures in the state, The Huffington Post has learned. The state’s election watchdog agency, the Fair Political Practices Commission, which launched the inquiry last November, is working closely with the California attorney general’s office, according to a person familiar with the matter. They have issued about a dozen new subpoenas to individuals and organizations for financial records, according to the person, who requested anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the probe. The latest round of subpoenas represents a major development in the investigation and comes on top of several subpoenas previously sent to the California PAC that spent the $11 million and three nonprofit groups that are not required to reveal their donors, including one with ties to the billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch. The inquiry was sparked because of a California law requiring contributors to state initiatives be publicly disclosed. Investigators are reviewing how these nonprofit groups were used to shield the identities of donors and attempting to trace the original funding sources. Gary Winuk, a spokesman for the commission, declined to comment, as did Lynda Gledhill, a spokeswoman for the attorney general’s office. California’s decision to follow this murky million-dollar money trail is one of several recent legal actions around the country aimed at increasing transparency and curbing potential abuses of so-called dark money by politically active, tax-exempt groups known as 501(c)(4) social welfare organizations. More at http://ballot.org/news/california-officials-turn-heat-secretive-dark-money-groups
Quote:The New York attorney general last December issued new and tougher rules that require the disclosure of donors by social welfare groups that spend more than $10,000 to influence state and local races there. In January, a Montana court ruled against a dark money group that had been aggressively fighting state disclosure laws about its spending in 2008 in Montana and Colorado state elections. These legal actions have come as some campaign watchdogs and former Internal Revenue Service officials have voiced concerns about the adequacy of IRS oversight of these tax-exempt groups. Congressional interest in the political activities of dark money groups has also been mounting. Democratic Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, said in early March that he intends to hold hearings this year to “look into the failure of the IRS to enforce our tax laws and stem the flood of hundreds of millions of secret dollars flowing into our elections, eroding public confidence in our democracy.” Federal court rulings in 2010, including the Supreme Court's decision in the Citizens United case, paved the way for outside groups to raise unlimited sums from corporations, unions and individuals to directly back candidates. Since then, dark money groups have poured hundreds of millions into federal and state elections. These groups include the GOP-allied Crossroads GPS, which was co-founded by Republican strategist Karl Rove, and the Democratic-allied Priorities USA, which was founded by two former White House aides. Both groups, which like other social welfare outfits are supposed to operate separately from candidates' campaign committees, have drawn fire from campaign finance watchdogs for their hefty amounts of political spending. “The IRS has always given a little bit of attention to these groups, but not as much as called for,” former IRS Commissioner Sheldon Cohen told The Huffington Post. “The spending by some (c)(4) groups has pushed the envelope in terms of political activities.” Cohen added that the problem of increased political spending by tax-exempt groups “has burgeoned,” while noting that budget constraints have often crimped the IRS's regulatory capacities. Same
Quote:The California investigation into the mysterious origins of the $11 million spent on two ballot initiatives there seems to be generating the most heat. When it launched the probe in November, the state’s Fair Political Practices Commission called the donation the “largest contribution ever disclosed as campaign money laundering in California history.” The controversy erupted shortly before Election Day when a state PAC, the Small Business Action Committee, reported spending $11 million on two ballot measures. One was aimed at fighting a tax hike backed by Gov. Jerry Brown (D), while the other would have curbed union spending on elections. In its reports to the state, the PAC revealed only that the funds had arrived in mid-October from Americans for Responsible Leadership, a 2-year-old dark money outfit based in Arizona that had never before been involved in California elections. Seeking to pierce the funding veil, the commission took the matter to the California Supreme Court, which ordered Americans for Responsible Leadership to disclose where the funds originated. In response, the Arizona group pointed the finger at a Virginia-based nonprofit, Americans for Job Security -- which spent close to $16 million to help GOP candidates including Mitt Romney last year -- as the source. In a further twist, AJS had channeled the funds to a group called the Center to Protect Patient Rights, which is run by Sean Noble, a well-known Koch operative. The center then handed the $11 million over to Americans for Responsible Leadership. (Despite their under-the-radar spending drive, the groups failed to block the ballot measure hiking taxes, or to pass the one curbing union spending.) Same, and more can be read there.
YOUR OPTIONS
NEW POSTS TODAY
OTHER TOPICS
FFF.NET SOCIAL