Democrats postpone vote on speech-muzzling DISCLOSE Act for a massive fundraiser…

With the pretense of cleaning up our elections from “dirty” money, the Democrats in Washington want to pass a strident regulation called the DISCLOSE Act that would force organizations to mention large donors in their public ads (even if said ad isn’t paid for by the donor.)

That vote was scheduled for today. But they are postponing it until tomorrow. How come? Because Democrats, well, are busy today. Ben Smith from reports:

[B]ecause there’s something else going on [Wednesday]: A big New York fundraiser for the Senate Democrats….

The event has prices raising up to $15,200, but a mere $2,500 contributed or raised buys you access to a “VIP reception with members of Congress.”  The money goes to the House Senate Victory Fund, which splits its recepts between the DSCC and the DCCC.

“An individual can contribute as much as $60,800 per calendar year to the House Senate Victory Fund,” the invitation helpfully notes. (These donations will, it’s worth noting, be disclosed.)

And then, it’s back to D.C. to get all that big money out of politics.

The source who sent this one over puts it in the “you can’t make this up category.”

It would be funny, if it weren’t shameful. Democrats apparently believe that super huge fundraising events are only unseemly or dirty if conducted by the other party.



3 thoughts on “Democrats postpone vote on speech-muzzling DISCLOSE Act for a massive fundraiser…

  1. Charles says:

    The bill is bad because it exempts some non-profits. All non-profits whose membership meets a certain threshold, such as the Sierra Club, NRA, AARP and labor unions, are exempted from the stringent requirements that all businesses and smaller non-profits are held to. This would place a burden upon interests contrary to many Democrat positions and exempt many of its strongest allies.

    Political campaign speech must be wither an open playing field or regulated fairly. The DISCLOSE Act does neither, it’s a partisan bill.

  2. Andy K. says:

    What Steve said. This actually sounds like a good bill; since when is transparency a bad thing?

    That being said, the DNC hypocrisy is pretty jaw-dropping.

  3. Steve says:

    …and how exactly does this bill muzzle free speech?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



Receive our updates via email.