Skip to main content

Let’s All Say “Cards on the Table,” Again!

by Susan C. Strong, Founder & Executive Director, The Metaphor Project,

Business and personal cards, that is. Once again, the word “disclose” is in the air.  A federal appeals court recently ruled that big spending political groups must disclose their donors, despite Federal Election Commission fudging on the issue.(1) New light is also being focused on the much ignored second part of the Supreme Court’s naïve and devastating Citizens United decision—which clearly states that full disclosure of donor identity is required.(2) And according to YES! Magazine, as of Spring, 2012, ten states have already passed DISCLOSE bills, with a new one being debated in the California legislature right now (AB 1648).(3)  So it’s time for the rest of us to be heard again too.


Of course, as we all know, the Supreme Court cannot actually make laws or federal regulations (except by destroying them). Their having reaffirmed the requirement for disclosure might seem just pitiful, given what’s going on in political advertising now. However, if even a conservative majority of the Court felt the need to explicitly uphold disclosure in political ads, maybe there’s some hope. Perhaps some other brave campaign finance veterans besides Senator McCain will back a new Senate DISCLOSE bill. According to a May 20th, 2012 New York Times house editorial, McCain has shown interest in Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s (D, RI) new DISCLOSE bill, which requires “timely public disclosure of donors writing checks of $10,000 and more.” The bill also includes “‘stand by your ad’ identifications from the five biggest donors.”(4) Even though it has little chance to pass in this poisonous pre-election period, the attempt to create a new DISCLOSE bill would spotlight the issue anew.

As for other approaches to the Citizens United problem, no matter what the Supreme Court decides about the state of Montana’s right to outright ban corporate political contributions, the closely related issue of federal disclosure should remain up. Though the effort to get a constitutional amendment about who really has the right to free speech is vital, it is a long term project.(5) A vigorous “disclose” campaign now could call even greater attention to the pressing need for such an amendment.  

So let’s all say “cards on the table” again, as loudly as we can! We Americans must stop gambling with our country’s future. Let’s call the “cardsharks'” bluff!

Susan C. Strong is the founder and executive director of The Metaphor Project, , and author of our  new book, Move Our Message: How To Get America’s Ear (The Metaphor Project, 2012, 172 pp, trade paperback, $10, available via our site). The Metaphor Project has been helping progressives mainstream their messages since 1997.

l. The New York Times, 4.02.2012, “A Judge Turns on the Light.” The FEC had ruled that only money that was explicitly contributed for political purposes had to be disclosed, creating a general “donations” loophole that became a superhighway, for deceptive, so-called “issue ads” that actually mentioned candidate names. Although it is probable that the federal court ruling will be appealed, it is also likely that it will be upheld.

2. The New York Times, 5.20.12, mentioned the court’s opinion on disclosure in its house editorial, “Bring Back the Real Maverick.”

3. Spring 2012, p. 38.

4. See note 2 above.

5. Let’s also say “Corporations are things people made up,” and “Free speech is for honest people.” Getting the “not” out of our slogans will make them more effective. "Stand by your ad" is nice, but we need to highlight the dishonesty aspect more than that, in my view.

Originally posted to SusanCStrong on Fri Jun 01, 2012 at 11:01 AM PDT.

Also republished by Political Language and Messaging.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Words in slogans about DISCLOSURE matter! (0+ / 0-)

    The current slogan out there for this topic is "Stand by your ad." Short and punchy as it is, it won't reach very deep into those who are now refusing to do that. We need a slogan that is addressed to the rest of us, one that highlights the dishonesty involved in political advertising right now and leads to an action campaign by the 99%, rather than politely asking the 1% to "stand by their ads."

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site