election spending

While public records show billionaire casino mogul Sheldon Adelson and his wife Miriam gave over $53 million to pro-GOP super PACs in the 2012 campaign, he gave about $100 million more to secretive 501(c)(4) groups that do not disclose donors, according to a Huffington Post report. And now, Adelson is reportedly attempting to leverage his massive pro-GOP investment to spur House Republicans to pass legislation that would help his company.

As a point of comparison, the 2004 general election campaigns of President George W. Bush and Sen. John Kerry combined to spend less than $150 million.

A casino mogul would cozy up to a pro wealth, pro corporate, anti tax side of the GOP out of self gratification. But what about the other side of the same GOP that wants to have complete moral control out of Americans and could possibly turn on him as a sinner? No to worry, that side is only interested in what happens in your sex life, not any immorality in how you gain wealth. For them there is not any immorality possible that results in great wealth.

---

Stop secret election spending.

Dear Friend,

The U.S. Supreme Court's disastrous Citizens United v. FEC ruling has unleashed a torrent of anonymous campaign spending into our political system. And the results have been absolutely corrosive to our democracy.

Political organizations like Karl Rove's Crossroads GPS, powered by tens of millions of dollars in anonymous contributions, have spent alarming amounts of money to elect their preferred candidates.

And corporations have been able to exert a massive influence on our electoral process without being subject to any accountability for that influence.

Progressive champion Senator Sheldon Whitehouse is fighting back by pushing Congress to pass the DISCLOSE Act. And he has asked the public to join him as citizen co-sponsors.

As Sen. Whitehouse said, "We need a groundswell of support to show Congress that the American people want an end to the secret election spending that is threatening our democracy."

Become a citizen co-sponsor of the DISCLOSE Act of 2012 to end secret election spending. Click here to automatically add your name.

The DISCLOSE Act would force most groups spending money on elections to reveal the corporations, individuals and entities who fund them.

As the Washington trade publication The Hill explains:

The new version of the Disclose Act would require any group that spends $10,000 or more on election ads, or any other political activity, to file a disclosure report with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) within 24 hours. Groups would also have to file a new report for each additional $10,000 spent, disclose donors who gave $10,000 or more and provide a statement from the group's head ratifying that there was no coordination with any campaign, which is illegal.¹

While it won't end unlimited corporate election spending, the DISCLOSE Act at least brings this spending out of the shadows — where we can expose it, and fight back.

Become a citizen co-sponsor of the DISCLOSE Act of 2012 to end secret election spending. Click here to automatically add your name.

To be clear, what we really need is to get all corporate money out of politics, to roll back Citizens United, end corporate personhood and institute public financing of elections. And we are working hard toward those long term goals.

But the DISCLOSE Act is the first step to restoring the voice of everyday citizens in our elections, and restoring a small measure of sanity to a system of campaign finance that has become completely insane.

And even taking this first step will require a massive outcry by the American public to make sure Congress does not sweep this issue under the rug.

Become a citizen co-sponsor of the DISCLOSE Act of 2012 to end secret election spending. Click here to automatically add your name.

Matt Lockshin, Campaign Manager
CREDO Action from Working Assets

1. Senate Dems push 'Disclose Act 2.0', The Hill, March 21, 2012