""Republicans block bill requiring dark money groups to reveal donors"

"Republicans block bill requiring dark money groups to reveal donors"

"Senate Republicans voted Thursday to block the consideration of a bill to promptly require organizations that spend money on elections to promptly disclose the identities of donors who give $10,000 or more during an election cycle."

"The legislation, sponsored by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), has been a top Democratic priority since the Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United in 2010 that enabled corporations and other outside special interest groups to spend unlimited amounts of money on federal elections."

"Whitehouse noted in a press release issued ahead of the vote that political spending by groups that don’t disclose their donors increased from $5 million in 2006 to more than $1 billion in 2020. In addition, political spending by billionaires has increased from $17 million in the 2008 election to $1.2 billion in 2020."

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/...reveal-donors/

Question raised is why? Nearly daily we hear someone on the right say individuals as George Soros are funding Democrats, so why would the GOP be opposed to open disclosure of any amount over $10,000?

Pretty obvious politicians and judges can be bought today, especially considering the billions of dollars being secretly funding into elections, so why would anyone resist an effort to find out who buys who, particularly considering the probable involvement of foreign nations covertly contributing to politicians?

 

of course they did

 

""Whitehouse noted in a press release issued ahead of the vote that political spending by groups that don’t disclose their donors increased from $5 million in 2006 to more than $1 billion in 2020. In addition, political spending by billionaires has increased from $17 million in the 2008 election to $1.2 billion in 2020.""

Check the national debt then vs now

the more money donated, the more money spent

 

Great idea; deprives LW loonies from harassing and intimidating donors and their families, damaging their properties and holding mostly peaceful protests at their homes and businesses.

 

So they tell us, why would the right and GOP be against full disclosure?

 

I just told you.

 

So which megadonors have been harassed by dems?
https://www.opensecrets.org/elections-overview/biggest-donors

 

That doesn't specify how much to what candidate, nor would include businesses or foreign nations

 

Oh, so you are saying it is perfectly alright for individuals/businesses/foreign nations, or any entity with the capability, to buy politicians and judges since disclosing who gives to who might led to harassment by Democrats? And its ironic you didn't mention the same might happen to Democrat contributors

 

And left will believe whatever the DNC tell them Clearly they don't want it disclosed any more than their GOP brethren do LMFAO. The DNC love themselves a fool, and both parties have use right where they like us oblivious to the inner workings of the den of thieves

The real darkness is in the heads of voters that believe the GOP and the DNC are not complicit in all this bullshit

Democrats Now Dominate Dark Money Spending. They Still Want To End It. | HuffPost Latest News

 

Dems don't want donors disclosed, but are pushing for a bill that requires disclosure of large donations. Okay...

 

Smoke and mirrors Look how it works

 

Ah, every Democrat voted for the measure, every Republican against it, and the Democrats have been trying to get it passed for over a decade, so the "they don't want it disclosed" is erroneous, plus, it was Obama who warned about the evils of the Citizens United decision during his State of the Union nearly immediately after it happened

And the "complicit" generalization is just that, a generalization, and not relevant to the topic

 

So should all donations be private?

 

Yeah, every anonymous donation over ten grand has to be disclosed, not that complicated

 

Yup and now they BOTH go one with it Or are you disputing the Huffington post

 

You would think! Then again your or I don't benefit from all that DARK MONEY

 

How about limiting individual donations to $20.and corporate donations to $0? All contact between lobbyists and politicians to be live streamed and recorded.

 

So dems made republicans vote against the bill? What smoke and mirrors ploy did they use?

 

What does "they BOTH go one with" mean?

And yes, according to the article anyways, currently, from what can be determined, and remember if it is truly anonymous, who knows who gives what to who, the Democrats benefit more, which makes it even more inane why the GOP would not want to end anonymous donors

 

I have no problem with entities contributing, although I would support limits on contributions, but it would be nice and informative to see who contributes what to who, especially when it comes to Judges

 

What does "your or I don't benefit from all that DARK MONEY" mean?

The only ones who benefit from dark money are those accepting the money and the entities giving it, we are hurt not knowing who gives what to who

 

Why should corporations have more power than individuals?

 

Citizen's United (a misnomer), worst SCOTUS ruling ever for average Americans.

I get the cynicism but this deep need to equate and gas light B/S is failing again.

 

Nope. Donations directly to candidate are limited and must be declared.