Learn more about our policy experts.

Media Contacts

Angela Bradbery, Director of Communications
w. (202) 588-7741
c. (202) 503-6768
abradbery@citizen.org, Twitter

Barbara Holzer, Broadcast Manager
w. (202) 588-7716
bholzer@citizen.org

Karilyn Gower, Press Officer
w. (202) 588-7779
kgower@citizen.org

Ben Somberg, Press Officer (regulatory matters)
w. (202) 588-7742
bsomberg@citizen.org, Twitter

Other Important Links

Press Release Database
Citizen Vox blog
Texas Vox blog
Consumer Law and Policy blog
Energy Vox blog
Eyes on Trade blog
Facebook/publiccitizen

Follow us on Twitter

 

May 6, 2010
  
Public Citizen to Congress: Legislation to Restrain Corporate Election Spending Is Crucial for Democracy

Public Citizen Supports the DISCLOSE Act, Recommends Strengthening It

WASHINGTON, D.C. - Before the 2010 elections, Congress should approve legislation designed to restrain corporate election spending and close the loopholes of current campaign finance laws, Public Citizen told the Committee on House Appropriations today.

The DISCLOSE Act (H.R. 5175), which stands for Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections, was introduced in the House of Representatives by Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.) and in the Senate by Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.). It would restrict foreign influence in American elections, strengthen pay-to-play law and provide the most extensive transparency regime to date. That said, the bill must be strengthened, said Craig Holman, government affairs lobbyist with Public Citizen, in his testimony.

“This legislation helps to combat the onslaught of corporate-funded campaign ads that are expected after the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which allows corporations to spend unlimited amounts to influence elections,” Holman said. “Today, corporate lobbyists can walk into a lobbying meeting carrying a big stick to intimidate lawmakers. A healthy democracy is going to have a hard time surviving this corporate onslaught without meaningful measures to mitigate the corrupting role of unlimited corporate money.”

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is gearing up for a massive spending campaign in state judicial contests as well as federal congressional races in 2010. It’s already begun the effort; in the Massachusetts special election in January 2010, the Chamber spent about $1 million in corporate funds on so-called issue ads in the final days of the U.S. Senate campaign to help elect Scott Brown.

That’s just the beginning. The Chamber has pledged to take advantage of the new absence of constraints on corporate money in elections and further bolster its corporate revenues for political activity. It boasts that it will spend about $200 million on politics this year - double what it spent last year - with about $50 million of that money funneled into state judicial and federal congressional elections.

“Add to that figure the money countless corporations will pour into the election,” Holman said. “It is starting to paint a picture of corpocracy over democracy, isn’t it?”

Some highlights of the DISCLOSE Act, as it stands, include requiring:

* Corporations, labor unions, nonprofit groups and political organizations that spend more than $10,000 on electioneering to report all donors who have given $1,000 or more, unless the donor specified that the donation could not be used for election purposes;
* Groups that sponsor broadcast ads to include a “stand by your ad” disclaimer in which the groups’ highest ranking official appear and approve the message; and
* Groups that make campaign-related expenditures to disclose them on their Web page within 24 hours.

The DISCLOSE Act is a great first step to reining in the corporate power expected to take over elections, Holman said. But it must be strengthened. The legislation should borrow more from states’ experiences involving pay-to-play (a system that prohibits government contractors from making political contributions and expenditures on behalf of those issuing the contracts) to make the provisions more far-reaching. The bill also should require disclosure outside of the time periods outlined in the bill, Holman said.

In addition, Public Citizen encourages Congress to proceed with bolder measures that would:

* Provide candidates with substantial public financing for their campaigns to help offset new corporate spending in elections (Fair Elections Now Act, H.R. 1826 and S. 751).
* Require that any significant corporate expenditure in politics be approved by a majority of outstanding shareholders (Shareholder Protection Act, H.R. 4790).
* Promote a constitutional amendment that clarifies that First Amendment protections do not apply to for-profit corporations, except for legitimate media organizations, and that corporations therefore do not have the right to spend unlimited amounts of money to influence election outcomes. Shortly after the Citizens United ruling was issued, Public Citizen launched a campaign for a constitutional amendment. It currently has more than 52,000 signers (see www.DontGetRolled.org).


###

Copyright © 2014 Public Citizen. Some rights reserved. Non-commercial use of text and images in which Public Citizen holds the copyright is permitted, with attribution, under the terms and conditions of a Creative Commons License. This Web site is shared by Public Citizen Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation. Learn More about the distinction between these two components of Public Citizen.


Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation

 

Together, two separate corporate entities called Public Citizen, Inc. and Public Citizen Foundation, Inc., form Public Citizen. Both entities are part of the same overall organization, and this Web site refers to the two organizations collectively as Public Citizen.

Although the work of the two components overlaps, some activities are done by one component and not the other. The primary distinction is with respect to lobbying activity. Public Citizen, Inc., an IRS § 501(c)(4) entity, lobbies Congress to advance Public Citizen’s mission of protecting public health and safety, advancing government transparency, and urging corporate accountability. Public Citizen Foundation, however, is an IRS § 501(c)(3) organization. Accordingly, its ability to engage in lobbying is limited by federal law, but it may receive donations that are tax-deductible by the contributor. Public Citizen Inc. does most of the lobbying activity discussed on the Public Citizen Web site. Public Citizen Foundation performs most of the litigation and education activities discussed on the Web site.

You may make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., Public Citizen Foundation, or both. Contributions to both organizations are used to support our public interest work. However, each Public Citizen component will use only the funds contributed directly to it to carry out the activities it conducts as part of Public Citizen’s mission. Only gifts to the Foundation are tax-deductible. Individuals who want to join Public Citizen should make a contribution to Public Citizen, Inc., which will not be tax deductible.

 

To become a member of Public Citizen, click here.
To become a member and make an additional tax-deductible donation to Public Citizen Foundation, click here.