That's what Ezra Klein recommends, using the IRS situation to highlight the fallout from the Citizens United ruling: political-donor secrecy.
Scandals usually lead to reform. Maybe not this time.
by Ezra Klein, washingtonpost.com -- May 24, 2013
[...]
The Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision enabled 501(c)(4) groups to be commandeered for unlimited political spending. Republican consultant Karl Rove, unions and other big players tested IRS rules restricting how politically engaged 501(c)(4) groups could be. They found they were able to use the groups almost exclusively for political purposes without inviting IRS scrutiny. Soon, the IRS’s Determinations Unit in Cincinnati, which processes 501(c)(4) applications, was inundated.
[...]
Disclose Act
Although the dangers are obvious, the odds of reform are slim. Republicans like the status quo. In 2012, Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island sponsored the Disclose Act, which would have required such groups to disclose donors who had contributed more than $10,000 and to list their top five donors in their campaign ads. By eliminating anonymity for donors, the legislation would have made these groups less attractive vehicles for partisan politics. The Disclose Act was killed by Republican filibuster.
Republicans want to prosecute the IRS scandal, but they’ve offered no remedies for the murky campaign finance rules at the root of it. Why? Because they’re not actually upset about the underlying problem; those rules helped Republicans raise hundreds of millions in 2012.
[...]
That's also what Nancy Pelosi is calling for, making the dark money behind tax exempt organizations
more transparency:
Nancy Pelosi uses IRS mess to call for campaign finance reform
by Tarnini Parti, politico.com -- 5/13/13
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi condemned the Internal Revenue Service for targeting conservative groups in a statement Monday, and also used the opportunity to push for campaign finance reform.
“There needs to be more clarity in the law regarding the activities of tax exempt organizations along with greater disclosure and transparency,” Pelosi said in the statement Monday.
[...]
In California the state legislature is moving beyond the recommendations, they're acting to shine a light on the back-channels of Campaign Finance:
California Campaign Finance Reform Bills Pass Senate
by Alex Gauthier, money-talks -- 05/30/2013
[...]
Support for SB 52, also called the “DISCLOSE Act” -- not to be confused with Chris Van Hollen (D-Maryland) and Chuck Schumer’s (D-New York) efforts at the national level -- has followed a concerted public awareness effort from proponents and its sponsors, Sens. Jerry Hill (D-San Mateo) and Mark Leno (D-San Francisco).
The bill passed Wednesday after a 28-11 vote.
If signed into law, SB 52 would require the top three donors (over $10,000 for statewide positions and $2,000 for local races) of a political advertisement be openly identified either in the ad itself or on the campaign’s website. It would also compel disclosure for ‘issue advocacy’ advertisements, which may not directly support/condemn a candidate running for office, but can potentially influence voter choice.
[...]
In New York the voters are rallying to get their the state legislature to act too. Of course they're running into the usual resistance, from the Party who likes the dark money channels just the way they are.
New Yorkers Rally For Campaign Finance Reform
by Josh Israel, thinkprogress.org -- May 31, 2013
[...]
Hundreds of New Yorkers rallied in Albany on Wednesday to urge the New York Senate to enact campaign finance reform legislation, including public financing for state candidates. But while the State Assembly has already passed a reform bill, the Senate’s governing coalition has yet to bring forward a bill with less than a month left in session.
[...]
A stunning number of New York State Senators have, in recent years, been charged with ethical violations. While both the Democratic conference and the IDC have proposed comprehensive campaign finance reform bills, the Republicans have thus far opposed any such efforts. Earlier this month, Republican Leader Dean Skelos actually called the proposals “a recipe for political corruption.”
[...]
If it's true that "
Money Talks" in America, shouldn't the America People have the right to know,
exactly who it is doing the talking?
Shouldn't we know who it is who is "financing" all these "tax exempt" social political organizations?
Funny thing is, when I read the First Amendment, I don't see the word "Money" ANYWHERE in the text:
Amendment I
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Of course, I don't see anywhere in the Constitution either, where the Supreme Court can
Pick the President either.
Funny that one. Ha Ha. THAT was a laugh riot, too. Thanks Supremes!
Those "scales of justice" sure are "fair and balanced" under your watch.