Disclosure Act Defeated, Again!

[Guest oldfella]

Our letter-writing campaign did it again!

________________________________________

DISCLOSE Act Defeated in Senate

Gun Owners of America E-Mail Alert

8001 Forbes Place, Suite 102, Springfield, VA 22151

Phone: 703-321-8585 / FAX: 703-321-8408

Gun Owners of America

Thursday, September 23, 2010

The U.S. Senate today defeated the so-called DISCLOSE Act when it failed to garner the 60 votes necessary to overcome Republican objections to the bill. The final vote was 59-39.

Even though the exact same bill, sponsored by Chuck Schumer (D-NY), had been defeated just two months ago and was unlikely to pass, anti-gun Majority Leader Harry Reid (NV) brought it up for another vote to "stir up" his left-wing base.

Instead of protecting the most important type of speech protected by the First Amendment -- political speech -- with this bill Congress attempted to force groups like GOA to "disclose" the names of donors in certain political advertisements.

Since Gun Owners of America will never disclose its membership lists to the federal government, it could be prohibited from running radio or TV ads exposing a federal candidate's voting record in the weeks leading up to an election.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (KY) aptly summed up the bill when it came to the floor in July:

"This DISCLOSE Act is not about reform, it's nothing more than Democrats sitting behind closed doors [choosing] which favored groups they want to speak in the 2010 elections -- all in an attempt to protect themselves from criticism of their government takeovers, record deficits and massive unpaid-for expansions of the federal government into the lives of the American people."

With a lame-duck session of Congress looming after the election, anything is possible -- including another attempt to push through DISCLOSE. So please stay tuned.

[mikegideon]

This isn't an anti-gun move. Has nothing to do with guns.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

But it does have to do with groups of people that shouldn't have to be made public

so they can be coerced into something they don't want any part of. Privacy is also part

of speech. Remember without the 2nd Amendment, you probably wouldn't have the first.

It's a bill that the Dems would use to identify their enemies, one of which is GOA.

[mikegideon]

But it does have to do with groups of people that shouldn't have to be made public

so they can be coerced into something they don't want any part of. Privacy is also part

of speech. Remember without the 2nd Amendment, you probably wouldn't have the first.

It's a bill that the Dems would use to identify their enemies, one of which is GOA.

I'm thinking they're alot more concerned about Phizer, Toyota, etc. Of course you can spin it to put fear into the average Joe, but it has nothing to do with that. It just sounds better than letting major corporations buy more politicians.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

The trouble with every law they have passed will

always be the intended or unintended consequence

that creeps up when you least expect it.

It pays to keep this stuff open for all to view before

they pass anything. There are too many examples

that come to mind. Just another reason for a purge

of Congress. None of this is in the peoples' interest.

[USMCJG]

I'm thinking they're alot more concerned about Phizer, Toyota, etc. Of course you can spin it to put fear into the average Joe, but it has nothing to do with that. It just sounds better than letting major corporations buy more politicians.

It's really more about protecting their majority. It's about letting labor unions buy more elections. Nine of the top fifteen political contributors are labor unions, and every single one of them leans heavily Democrat. Strangely, every single one of them would be exempt from the Disclosure Act.

ETA- Also, Phizer is 35th in total campaign contributions behind 13 different labor unions. And Toyota didn't even make the top 129.

Edited September 24, 2010 by USMCJG

[Worriedman]

Toyota does not appear to be problematic, unless one wants only Unions to be able to fund campaigns. Government Motors is getting into the act now, even though it is 61% owned by the taxpayers. I personally do not understand how they can take my tax money and support a political campaign I did not get asked about, and I wonder which party they will be supporting?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Just one more reason to get rid of those elites and their messiah, starting in

about a month.