DC Check-In: Disclose Act and Farm Bill

Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Inside the dome of the US Capitol building (O Palsson/flickr)

Yesterday the Senate failed to advance the DISCLOSE Act, which would have required more transparency in political donations. Niels Lesniewski, editor of CQ Senate Watch, looks at the vote, and another key piece of legislation which did pass the Senate - but may get held up in Congress - the Farm bill.

→ Read the Bills (PDF): DISCLOSE Act | Senate Farm Bill


Niels Lesniewski

Comments [16]

Using a 'nom de blog' is one thing backing a political position, party or candidate and expecting anonymity is something other. I suppose that both show a fear of retribution which is regrettable in a supposedly free society. However, one can be borne without significant impact to the society that enables it. The other cannot because its misuse threatens that free society.

In a perfect world, we are each willing to put our name on our opinions without fear of retribution.

Jul. 17 2012 10:58 AM
David from Fredericksburg, VA

@ Howard from Da Bronx

Don't you know how it works now? You don't have to actually stand up and talk to filibuster, just say "I filibuster this bill."

If these clowns actually had to stand and talk for hour after hour, a lot less filibustering would occur.

Jul. 17 2012 10:46 AM
David from Fredericksburg, VA

@ hjs11211

Well, since most of the population is in cities, it would be unsuprising if most food stamps are used there.

If you'd like to know what's going on in a meaningful way, you need to know percentages - i.e. x% of urban residents received food stamps, y% of rural residents do, is X greater than, less than, or equal to y?

Jul. 17 2012 10:43 AM
Alex from Brooklyn NY

why did the Democratic senate cut over 4 Billion???
see this:

Jul. 17 2012 10:43 AM
Nick from UWS

What IS this effin' BS that "corporations are people"? Corporations are conglomerations of MANY people, each with an individual and differing political voice. Corporations CANNOT have a monolithic voice as a single person. Why does anyone support the absurd and irrational basis of Citizens United? Why have the American people allowed a corrupt and criminal supreme court to hijack the election system and our democracy? WHAT IS THIS 'EFFIN BS?

Jul. 17 2012 10:43 AM
Howard from Da Bronx

The Democrats had 51 votes! If the Republicans want to filibuster, let them stand up and do so! Then we can see who stands for what. It worked in the Civil Rights era.

Jul. 17 2012 10:41 AM
gary from queens

Niels, the word is called "dependency." The fear is creating more dependency on gov.

Obama is actually inviting people to obtain food stamps on hispanic stations. that's were the votes are, you see.

Jul. 17 2012 10:41 AM

oh really?
Is brian saying people in WV or Alabama don’t use a lot of food stamps? I’d like to know if it's true what was suggested that most food stamps go to cities

Jul. 17 2012 10:40 AM
John A.

Why not get McCain and/or Feingold on? The commentary they generated for NPR This American Life (31-Mar-2012) was invaluable.

Jul. 17 2012 10:40 AM
David from Fredericksburg, VA

WHY don't the republicans want disclosure? Are you really asking why the prostitutes don't want to publish a list of their Johns?

Jul. 17 2012 10:37 AM
Jack Jackson from Central New Jersey

Is that it, MartinC? Because of the cut-off amount you think the DICLOSE Act bill is biased in favor of public unions? Gimme a break...

What's wrong with indentifying individuals AND groups that give more than $10K?

Jul. 17 2012 10:34 AM
Holley Atkinson from Brooklyn

Re Mitch McConnell railing mendaciously about Democrats "going after the microphone".

Last time I checked, if you step up to a microphone to practice your right to free speech, we can hear you AND see your face.

Campaign spending that's undisclosed is NOT at all the same as stepping up to a mic, and McConnell knows that.

Jul. 17 2012 10:32 AM
thatgirl from manhattan

so it's okay to shroud high rollers who donate campaign cash, but make seniors and other disenfranchised voters have to pull out their birth certificates to prove they are worthy to vote? freaks.

Jul. 17 2012 10:31 AM
gary from queens

I actually tended to favor disclosure legislation, until Obama's Chicago thug behavior this year showed me the consequences of such laws.

Before the Obama campaign decided to make examples of Frank VanderSloot and seven other major Romney supporters, few Americans had ever heard of the Idaho Falls businessman. But since then, a private investigator with Democratic ties has tried to get into his sealed divorce records, his children have been harassed, and he has lost customers. He hasn’t been deterred personally and says he may just increase his contribution to Mr. Obama’s challenger to show that he cannot be intimidated. What Mr. VanderSloot and most of those who have commented on his travails misses is that it is not about him.

These threats are aimed instead at the hundreds and perhaps thousands of potential Romney contributors who will slink away lest they, too, become targets of the Obama attack machine. What Mr. Obama’s political managers are doing by so viciously attacking those who would support the president’s opponent is precisely what former Obama Environmental Protection Agency official Al Armendariz bragged about doing when he compared his agency’s strategy to that pursued centuries ago by Rome’s legions:

“You make examples out of people. … And you hit them as hard as you can,” Armendariz told a town-hall meeting in 2010. “It was kind of like how the Romans used to, you know, conquer villages in the Mediterranean,” he told his audience. “They’d go into a little Turkish town somewhere, they’d find the first five guys they saw, and they’d crucify them. And then, you know, that town was really easy to manage for the next few years.”

Obama’s plan to ‘crucify’ political opponents
Targeting Romney donors is meant to scare away others
By David Keene
Tuesday, May 15, 2012

Jul. 17 2012 10:30 AM

Please ask what percent of farm bill goodies go to red states and what percent is going to blue states? I ask because as a blue state tax payer I’ve noticed in past years red states get more federal dollars per tax dollar paid.
This sounds like red state socialism

Jul. 17 2012 10:15 AM
Martin Chuzzlewit from Manhattan

OK....let's ask Brian once again to ask a guest....does THIS version of the DISCLOSE ACT require transparency for UNIONS as well? Chuckie Schumer's original version did NOT.

Walter Russell Meade (no conservative) wrote this past weekend on the massive special interest financial power of the teachers unions, and they are slightly less super-rich than the other government union funds.

"The deep pockets of teachers unions and other public sector unions provide the financial infrastructure that keeps the Left in business.
It’s the ultimate political machine."

"The fight over the future of public sector unions may be the most important political battle in the United States today."

Jul. 17 2012 09:47 AM

Leave a Comment

Email addresses are required but never displayed.

Get the WNYC Morning Brief in your inbox.
We'll send you our top 5 stories every day, plus breaking news and weather.