WASHINGTON — For the second time in as many days, GOP members of the U.S. Senate objected to a campaign finance disclosure bill sponsored by both of Minnesota’s Democratic Senators.
The DISCLOSE Act would require political organizations to identify donors who give more than $10,000. Democrats say the bill would overturn some of the more egregious parts of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision, which opened the door to unlimited political spending by, and anonymous donations to, such groups. The bill failed on a procedural vote, 53-45, nearly the same tally as the vote taken Monday evening.
The DISCLOSE Act wouldn’t undo any other part of the Citizens United decision — corporate and labor spending would still be permitted, and there would be no contribution limits for those giving to so-called “Super PACs,” but such groups would need to disclose their biggest donors.
“This bill is not a panacea. It will not overturn Citizens United, and it will not stop the tsunami of money pouring in from corporations,” Sen. Al Franken, a member of the group of liberal lawmakers who introduced the bill, said. “But it will require that all that special interest money be disclosed publicly, and that will have tremendously beneficial effects for this country. We may not be able to stop the tidal wave of unlimited cash, but we can, and we should, at a minimum know who is writing those big checks.”
The Supreme Court did not block Congress from requiring disclosure in its Citizens United decision. In fact, the court encouraged it, Franken said, quoting the decision, written by Justice Anthony Kennedy, in a floor speech Monday: “The First Amendment protects political speech; and disclosure permits citizens and shareholders to react to the speech of corporate entities in a proper way. This transparency enables the electorate to make informed decisions and give proper weight to different speakers and messages.”
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, pulled the same quotation when addressing the Senate on Monday.
“In reality it is a modest bill in comparison to the size of the problem, but it is a first step toward bringing some sensibleness back to the elections,” she said. “This bill simply ensures the public has access to information about the funding behind television ads and other election materials.”
Republicans objected for a variety of reasons. Sen. John McCain, who helped write massive campaign finance regulations 10 years ago, has said the bill is overly political. Lisa Murkowski, of Alaska, said she supported the underlying reasons for the bill but would like to see bipartisan legislation work its way through the legislative process, rather than being called directly to the floor for a vote. Alabama Sen. Jeff Sessions, noting that the Senate hasn't passed a budget resolution in three years, said the chamber should be focusing on more pressing issues, like the budget, a deficit reduction package or Congress’ 13 appropriations bills, of which the Senate has taken up none.
“The Senate ought to disclose to the American people what its budget plan is for this country,” he said. “Those are the bread and butter requirements of any Senator.”
The DISCLOSE Act has 39 co-sponsors, all Democrats. It needed 60 votes to pass, but fell seven votes short. The Senate tried passing a beefed-up version of the DISCLOSE Act last session, but it fell one vote short of the 60-vote threshold when all Republicans objected.
Devin Henry can be reached at dhenry@minnpost.com. Follow him on Twitter: @dhenry