PDA

View Full Version : Obama Obama trying end around 'Citizens United' via executive diktat


Bewbies
04-26-2011, 01:33 PM
Yeah, I wanted to write 'Diktat....'

If you're a union don't worry, this doesn't apply to you. (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704570704576275341529251056.html) LMAO

The White House Wants a List
Want a federal contract? Show politicians the money.

Here's another reason to think the 2012 campaign is underway with a vengeance: If a company wants a federal government contract, from now on it will first have to disclose if the company or its executives gave more than $5,000 in political donations.

This latest federal rule comes courtesy of a new executive order now being drafted in the White House. The order would implement parts of last year's Disclose Act, which failed to pass Congress but was a favorite of Democrats because it would deter political contributions by business after last year's Citizens United v. FEC Supreme Court decision. White House press secretary Jay Carney confirmed last week that the order is in the works after former Federal Election Commission official Hans von Spakovsky obtained a copy of the draft.

The draft of the executive order describes the rule's purpose as a way to ensure the federal contracting system is free from the influence of "political activity or political favoritism." Hmmm. Last we checked, government contractors were already required to disclose contributions to candidates. The new twist here is the disclosure of donations to independent groups, a category in which conservatives outspent liberals for the first time in the last election cycle.

And what do you know? The draft order doesn't cover federal employee labor unions, the Democratic allies whose free speech rights were recognized alongside corporations in Citizens United. Nor do the disclosure requirements extend to recipients of federal grants, which often run into the millions of dollars. These donees are usually Democrats too.

Federal contracts are supposed to go to the lowest bidder, so it's hard to see how disclosure of political contributions would help contract decisions. Mandatory disclosure would impose politics on federal procurement choices as never before.

Even GOP strongman Tom DeLay never tried this one during his K Street heyday, though you can imagine the howls if he had. The closest we can come to something comparable is former Nixon henchman John Dean's memo during the Watergate era that the point of keeping an "enemies list" was to "determine what sorts of dealings these individuals have with the Federal Government and how we can best screw them (e.g., grant availability, federal contracts, litigation prosecution, etc.)."

These days the White House proxies on the political left will do the enemy listing. Disclosure may sound nice, but the real point is to put companies on notice that their political contributions will have, well, consequences. When the Disclose Act was before Congress, New York Democrat and co-sponsor Chuck Schumer made clear the bill was designed to "embarrass companies" out of exercising the rights recognized in Citizens United. "The deterrent effect should not be underestimated," he said.

Exhibit A was last year's campaign against Target Corp. When the retailer donated $150,000 to an independent group running ads in the Minnesota governor's race, MoveOn.org smeared the company as antigay, threatened a boycott, and said Target needed to be made an example of or such donations could be "the tip of the iceberg." Target stopped donating to that group.

The executive order is only the latest Democratic effort to intimidate business donors. Last month, the liberal Media Access Project asked the Federal Communications Commission to begin requiring groups that run political ads to disclose their major donors on the air, a wacky interpretation of the 1934 Communications Act. Last week, Maryland Democrat Chis van Hollen sued the FEC to demand donor disclosure.

The point of all this is to discourage political speech by certain speakers. Citizens United was a landmark victory for liberty because it blew a huge hole in the architecture of campaign finance limits that had increasingly restricted political speech. Having failed to overrule Citizens United in Congress, Democrats now want to do it via executive diktat. Remember when Barack Obama campaigned as a postpartisan who'd stop all that Washington nastiness?

chiefsnorth
04-26-2011, 02:01 PM
Hilarious how unions get exempted from every new rule and regulation.

Simplex3
04-26-2011, 02:10 PM
Hilarious how unions get exempted from every new rule and regulation.

In the same way colon cancer is hilarious.

Bewbies
04-26-2011, 02:31 PM
I forgot which party union's give millions and millions and millions of dollars to?

BucEyedPea
04-26-2011, 02:43 PM
Bewbies,
Did you know this was the same type of thing FDR did during the Great Depression to keep himself elected?
That's right. A lot of the money handed out to those in need, came with a string attached that they vote Democratic. So much for the G-R-E-A-T Roosevelt. It all kept the Depression going on longer all while he was in office.


It's all truly disgusting and corrupt—not matter who does it.

HonestChieffan
04-26-2011, 02:59 PM
Question is, how can congress step in and stop it?

Bewbies
04-26-2011, 03:01 PM
Bewbies,
Did you know this was the same type of thing FDR did during the Great Depression to keep himself elected?
That's right. A lot of the money handed out to those in need, came with a string attached that they vote Democratic. So much for the G-R-E-A-T Roosevelt. It all kept the Depression going on longer all while he was in office.


It's all truly disgusting and corrupt—not matter who does it.

For sure. FDR is not the hero people make him out to be.

I'm reading a book about Deitrich Bonhoeffer right now, and the section about what Hitler tried to become, to represent and be viewed as is SPOOKY as we just lived through the same thing.

Jaric
04-26-2011, 03:13 PM
In the same way colon cancer is hilarious.

Fart and poop jokes are always funny...

:evil:

mikey23545
04-26-2011, 04:22 PM
Orange attempt at rebuttal in 5, 4, 3...

Bewbies
04-26-2011, 07:20 PM
Orange attempt at rebuttal in 5, 4, 3...

I wouldn't go with rebuttal, I'll say he'll tell us this isn't a big deal. LMAO

BucEyedPea
04-26-2011, 08:57 PM
Question is, how can congress step in and stop it?

That's a good question. I say impeach as it's corrupt.

BucEyedPea
04-26-2011, 08:57 PM
I wouldn't go with rebuttal, I'll say he'll tell us this isn't a big deal. LMAO

Or something was left out, implying intentionally of course.

BucEyedPea
04-26-2011, 08:58 PM
Fart and poop jokes are always funny...

:evil:

butt slugs are funnier ROFL