Obama bypasses Congress, attempts to force companies to reveal political donations

[Revmitchell]

The Obama administration is attempting to bypass Congress and force publicly-traded companies to reveal their political donations through regulation.

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Corporate Finance has begun the steps necessary to create a regulation that would in many ways mirror the DISCLOSE Act — a bill Senate Democrats have failed to pass through Congress.

Created in reaction to the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court ruling that said corporations and unions could not have limits placed on their political expenditures, the Senate bill would require political organizations to publicly name their donors and the amounts they give.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/18/o...eal-political-donations-to-sec/#ixzz2IKx2FjY0

 

[Magnetic Poles]

Good. We need to know who is buying the people who are supposed to be representing "We the People". I saw something that said Congressmen should wear suits like NASCAR drivers, so we know who their sponsors are.

Of course Congress would be against such revelations.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Good. We need to know who is buying the people who are supposed to be representing "We the People". I saw something that said Congressmen should wear suits like NASCAR drivers, so we know who their sponsors are.

Of course Congress would be against such revelations.

I completely agree. There is no logical reason that the amount of political contributions by companies, special interest groups, PACS, etc. should not be public.

The Supreme Court decision was a terrible decision. It took the importance of the little contributor, you and me, out of the election. To raise enough money now to have a chance of being elected a person must be extremely rich, or sell their soul to corporations and special interest groups.

 

[Revmitchell]

1. Why does anyone need to know?

2. Bypassing congress for every little thing is contrary to the founding of this country.

 

[Crabtownboy]

1. Why does anyone need to know?

Haven't you argues for transparency in government?

Bypassing congress for every little thing is contrary to the founding of this country.

So is a policy of saying "No" to everything a president proposes, even their own ideas.

 

[Revmitchell]

Haven't you argues for transparency in government?

I have never argued for tranparency in people's donations to their representatives. Those are two different things.

So is a policy of saying "No" to everything a president proposes, even their own ideas.

Well they say no because the ideas they say no too are extreme and wrong for the country. When he presents an idea that will work and is not extreme then he will get some cooperation.

 

[Salty]

Hate to amidt it, but on this I think at the current time, I agree with Crabby

 

[Crabtownboy]

I have never argued for tranparency in people's donations to their representatives. Those are two different things.

Why should their donations be secret?

When he presents an idea that will work and is not extreme then he will get some cooperation.

So you admitting that the ideas pushed by the GOP in the past, but oppose when Obama proposes them, would not work and were extreme?

Be honest Rev.

 

[Revmitchell]

Hate to amidt it, but on this I think at the current time, I agree with Crabby

Really?! So you want Obama to bypass congress just whenever he feels like it?

You want everyone to have to disclose publicly what they give?

 

[Magnetic Poles]

It's called "Checks & Balances". Congress will never pass something that would expose to whom they are beholding. Without the opportunity for the Executive to force the issue, it is the proverbial fox guarding the hen house.

 

[Revmitchell]

It is not a check and balance. That is absurd

 

[Magnetic Poles]

It is not a check and balance. That is absurd

I have never seen someone so blinded by their own partisanship. Unbelievable.

 

[righteousdude2]

I Would Guess that...

...the purpose and reason behind his pushing this is more important than the fact that he is in fact, pushing to circumvent Congress to get a law that would reveal these folks and their contributions.

I can bet dollars to donuts that if this were a Republican, some of those who are attacking the Rev would instead be attacking the GOP POTUS for circumventing a Democratic led Congress.

I think the bipartisanship of the board is so predictable that it is :laugh:

 

[Aaron]

Good. We need to know who is buying the people who are supposed to be representing "We the People". I saw something that said Congressmen should wear suits like NASCAR drivers, so we know who their sponsors are.

Of course Congress would be against such revelations.

Should Reagan have used executive order to undo RvWade?