advertisement

LETTER: Voters deserve to know where money is coming from

Friday, October 22, 2010 | 3:12 p.m. CDT

If money is speech, do we as citizens have a right to know who is speaking? Secret campaign cash should have no place in our American democracy. However, since the Supreme Court's January decision (Citizens United vs. the FCC), we are seeing huge sums of money from secret sources going into campaign advertising, much of it the negative advertising that poisons the airways.

Special interests are spending millions and millions of dollars in this election, threatening to drown out the voices of individual voters. And because of changes in the law, there are no disclosure requirements.

The League of Women Voters has been calling attention to secret money being spent on political advertising for months, but the U.S. Senate has refused to act to require disclosure, even after the House of Representatives passed a strong disclosure bill.

Now we are seeing the largest campaign expenditures in history, even as organizations accept tens of thousands of dollars from both American and foreign corporations. Essentially, these organizations are functioning as Political Action Committees but without having to follow the laws requiring disclosure of their donors. It should come as no surprise that they lobbied against the DISCLOSE Act in Congress, which would have stopped manipulation of elections by fly-by-night anonymous hit groups and prevented the infusion of undercover expenditures.

These activities are detrimental to our democracy. Voters deserve to know who is paying for election advertising. The League of Women Voters calls on all candidates to disavow advertising by groups that refuse to identify their donors.

Linda Kaiser is the president of League of Women Voters of Columbia-Boone County.


Like what you see here? Become a member.


Show Me the Errors (What's this?)

Report corrections or additions here. Leave comments below here.

You must be logged in to participate in the Show Me the Errors contest.


Comments

John Schultz October 22, 2010 | 10:51 p.m.

The DISCLOSE Act exempted unions from having to follow the new disclosure rules that the Democrats were trying to impose on corporations? Coincidence? I'm glad the bill failed, twice.

(Report Comment)

Leave a comment

Speak up and join the conversation! Make sure to follow the guidelines outlined below and register with our site. You must be logged in to comment. (Our full comment policy is here.)

  • Don't use obscene, profane or vulgar language.
  • Don't use language that makes personal attacks on fellow commenters or discriminates based on race, religion, gender or ethnicity.
  • Use your real first and last name when registering on the website. It will be published with every comment. (Read why we ask for that here.)
  • Don’t solicit or promote businesses.

We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report comment" link.

You must be logged in to comment.

Forget your password?

Don't have an account? Register here.

advertisements