BNJacksonGA

With the vote of 219 to 206, the Disclose Act, HR 5175, passes the House of Representatives and now moves on to the Senate.

Highly controversial, this bill is believed to be an infringement on Free Speech in violation of Amendment I of the Constitution of the United States of America.

"Congress shall make no law respecting ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

Representative Hal Rogers, of the 5th District of Kentucky voted no to this legislation.

Section 101-2 of the Bill prohibits TARP and EESA recipients from making any independent expenditure or disbursing any funds for an electioneering communication.

On the surface this seems pretty good.  Government funds should not be used to fund campaigns.  However, nothing in this bill prevents a third party to transmit the funds to a campaign.

Section 103-2-1 treats as contributions a publicly distributed or disseminated communication referring to a clearly identified candidate for federal office in cooperation with a candidate, a candidate's authorized committee, or a political committee of a political party.

This would include news stories, and public notices and communications referring to a candidate.  There is no provision regarding previous contracts being honored.

Section 103-2-2 requires any communication that republishes, disseminates, or distributes, in whole or in part, any broadcast or any written, graphic, or other form of material prepared by a candidate, or a candidate's authorized committee.

"The Trial of all Crimes shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed."

Again, news and important information may be excluded from the Public Domain.

It also Repeals the prohibition against contributions by individuals age 17 or younger.

Section 105 prohibits a communication which is disseminated through the Internet from being treated as a form of general public political advertising unless the communication was placed for a fee on another person's website.

On the surface, this seems like a good idea, however, it places the burden on the person who owns the website to prove they recieved no funds.  Guilty until proven Innocent.  Not the other way around.

Section 202 increases from 60 days to 120 days the period before a general election during which a communication shall be considered an electioneering communication.

Any communication about a candidate could be considered an electioneering communication.  Again, another provision which seeks to keep information from the People.

Section 211  requires tax-exempt charitable organizations, and political organizations other than political committees to include specified additional information in reports on independent expenditures of at least $10,000, including deemed transfers of money, but excluding amounts paid from separate segregated funds as well as amounts designated for specified campaign-related activities.

The Devil is in the Details.  While tax exempt organizations now would be able to donate to a campaign, it must be reported to the Government.  If the Government doesn't like it, they can bring you, as a member, before the Court.

This section also requires certain additional information in electioneering communication reports.

(Sec. 212) sets forth special rules for the use of general treasury funds by covered organizations for campaign-related activity, including both designated and unrestricted donor payments to an organization.

"Congress shall make no law respecting ... abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

This section would restrict a campaign committee's use of the funds for activities performed.

This sectoin also authorizes mutually agreed restrictions on the use of donated funds for campaign-related activity between a covered organization and a person who does not want his or her identity disclosed in a significant funder statement or a Top 5 Funders list.

The Top 5 Funders List is a duplication of effort designed to increase the documentary burden upon the Candidate.

Section 401 Authorizes judicial review of the provisions of this Act by the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, and on appeal by the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

Article III, Section 2, Paragraph 2 of the Constitution of the United States of America clearly states:

"The Trial of all Crimes shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed."

A crime is defined as a violation of the law.  Should a Candidate and Donor, both from Kentucky really be expected to travel to Washington, DC for thier trial?

Tags: Amendment I, America, Congress, Constitution, Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Devil, Disclose Act, EESA, Free Speech, Hal Rogers, House of Representatives, HR 5175, Internet, People, Senate, TARP, U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, United States