The Veteran’s Alliance for Security and Democracy has joined a growing list of civic-minded organizations filing complaints with the Federal Elections Commission and the IRS regarding the illegal and unethical interference of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce in the current election cycle.
Despite the Supreme Court’s best efforts to allow banks, corporations, and other special interests to use their vast resources to buy American elections, there are still a few laws in place—laws that extremist right-wing members of the Supreme Court have not (yet) managed to overturn.
One of those laws states that nonprofit organizations are banned from making contributions to candidates for federal offices. Another says that no foreign entities, including governments and corporations, can contribute to U.S. political parties or candidates. (Duh. Sounds like a good policy to me!)
Last week alone, the tax-exempt, allegedly “nonprofit” Chamber spend $10.5 million in support of 31 House and Senate candidates—all, of course, Republicans. This money comes from what the Chamber calls its “general fund”—the same pot into which money flows from most of the countries in the world, as well as countless foreign corporations.
How much money? How many countries? Which corporations?
Shhhhhhh. That’s all secret.
The Chamber says, “trust us.” They claim to have an “internal auditing system” that ensures that none of that tainted foreign currency is ever used to influence politics in America.
Okay, let’s use an analogy here. In most jurisdictions in America, people arrested for drug trafficking are likely to have their homes, automobiles, bank accounts, and other property seized by the government. Why? Because those individuals are believed to have profited from the drug trade. It may be that not one single cent of drug money was used to purchase the property in question; however, having access to money allows a person to buy more stuff. Where individuals are concerned, the government recognizes (rightly or wrongly—that’s a whole other subject) that having the money enables the person to buy the house, the car, etc.
But the Citizens United verdict that overturned decades of finance campaign law did not, as conservatives claim, put corporations and other special interest groups on the same footing as individual United States citizens; rather, it gave these groups enormous privileges—even beyond the privileges that money can buy—to do things individuals cannot. One of those special privileges is keeping secrets about their finances.
The outrage many people are expressing about the Chamber’s unwarranted and illegal interference in this election is well deserved. The Chamber doesn’t like the negative publicity, but it’s a problem the Chamber itself could easily resolve.
All it has to do is to open the books.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
When I first heard Obama make the accusation against the Chamber, the thought I had was he knows exactly how it's done because he got all sorts of foreign donations in 2008. He raised a record 3/4 of a billion dollars. Some of it from foreign countries and entities like Hamas. In fact he supposedly returned the $33,000 he got from "Palestinian" brothers from Rafah, Gaza.
Obama followed in the footsteps of Clinton/Gore and the Chinese fundraisers and donations. He learned well.
So if there is so much outrage, as you say, about the Chamber with not a shred of evidence why wasn't there "outrage" about Obama's buying of the election of 2008 with foreign money? So yeah, have Obama open up HIS books, too.
A certain person, we both know, recently said, "for heaven sakes, don't believe everything you read online!" Maybe Obama and others shouldn't believe some crazy blogger who puts a statement out there with no proof.
Smearing your opponents with lies right before an election is common practice. It used to be beneath the office of the President to engage in such behavior. I guess not any more. The office has been demeaned.
No proof?
The Chamber proudly admits to raking in piles of money from foreign governments and corporations. By its own admission, the (allegedly) nonprofit Chamber spends many millions of dollars on supporting exclusively GOP candidates.
These are undisputed facts, not opinions.
The only point of disagreement between the Chamber and its critics is that the Chamber doesn't feel it should have to abide by the laws.
Who is this "one crazy blogger" of whom you speak? And to what "statement" are you referring?
When Obama first made the accusation of the Chamber he said, "Just this week, we learned that one of the largest groups paying for these ads regularly takes in money from foreign corporations." He named his source: the blog of a liberal think tank.
So either A) Obama was telling the truth, and read something on a blog, or B) was lying and made it all up.
Time magazine's take on this is ...
"It's no great mystery what Barack Obama was doing when he accused the U.S. Chamber of Commerce of directing funds collected from overseas to a massive advertising campaign designed to shape the fall congressional elections. He wanted to remind voters that a powerful arm of corporate America is determined to derail some of the biggest elements of his domestic agenda. But he was also desperate to find some issue — even a contrived one — to inspire his cranky liberal base and avert a wipeout that could wreck the remainder of his term.
So are the real forces behind the 2010 midterms Middle Eastern oil companies and communist cash? Not quite. The chamber categorically denies the accusation, saying it spends "zero ... not a single cent" of foreign funds on its U.S. political activities. And media organizations found no evidence to the contrary: the nonpartisan FactCheck.org, for instance, called it "an unproven claim." When CBS News' Bob Schieffer pressed White House aide David Axelrod on whether he had evidence the chamber was spending significant amounts of foreign money on campaigns, Axelrod replied, "Do you have any evidence that it's not?" Schieffer then asked if a shaky charge of foreign influence three weeks before the election was the best he could do."
So, CJ, what laws is the Chamber "not abiding by?" Do you have proof? Or is your answer like Axelrod's version of "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
Chambers of commerce have been around since the 16th century. The U.S. Chamber has been around for 98 years. Obama has been around the oval office for less than 2 years. And yet, Obama has been a major threat to American business and the free enterprise system. Thank God for the Chamber for standing up against his destructive policies.
Once again, going back to the Time article ...
"So what's the White House really after? Payback."
"...with few popular achievements to brag about before the election, invoking the specter of secret corporate money might be Obama's last, best hope of showing liberals that he's made the right enemies — maybe not abroad but certainly at home."
Shameful use of the Office of the President.
When Obama first made the accusation of the Chamber he said, "Just this week, we learned that one of the largest groups paying for these ads regularly takes in money from foreign corporations." He named his source: the blog of a liberal think tank.
So either A) Obama was telling the truth, and read something on a blog, or B) was lying and made it all up.
Time magazine's take on this is ...
"It's no great mystery what Barack Obama was doing when he accused the U.S. Chamber of Commerce of directing funds collected from overseas to a massive advertising campaign designed to shape the fall congressional elections. He wanted to remind voters that a powerful arm of corporate America is determined to derail some of the biggest elements of his domestic agenda. But he was also desperate to find some issue — even a contrived one — to inspire his cranky liberal base and avert a wipeout that could wreck the remainder of his term.
So are the real forces behind the 2010 midterms Middle Eastern oil companies and communist cash? Not quite. The chamber categorically denies the accusation, saying it spends "zero ... not a single cent" of foreign funds on its U.S. political activities. And media organizations found no evidence to the contrary: the nonpartisan FactCheck.org, for instance, called it "an unproven claim." When CBS News' Bob Schieffer pressed White House aide David Axelrod on whether he had evidence the chamber was spending significant amounts of foreign money on campaigns, Axelrod replied, "Do you have any evidence that it's not?" Schieffer then asked if a shaky charge of foreign influence three weeks before the election was the best he could do."
So, CJ, what laws is the Chamber "not abiding by?" Do you have proof? Or is your answer like Axelrod's version of "Have you stopped beating your wife?"
Chambers of commerce have been around since the 16th century. The U.S. Chamber has been around for 98 years. Obama has been around the oval office for less than 2 years. And yet, Obama has been a major threat to American business and the free enterprise system. Thank God for the Chamber for standing up against his destructive policies.
Once again, going back to the Time article ...
"So what's the White House really after? Payback."
"...with few popular achievements to brag about before the election, invoking the specter of secret corporate money might be Obama's last, best hope of showing liberals that he's made the right enemies — maybe not abroad but certainly at home."
Shameful use of the Office of the President.
Post a Comment