The Skinny on Proposed Legislation in Response to Citizens United

It was only a matter of time before Congress decided to respond to the recent Citizens United decision. While Senator McCain is skeptical on new legislation, Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY), ranking member on the Senate Rules Committee (the Senate Committee with oversight of federal elections issues), and Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD) have decided to move ahead with legislation. A review of some of the "highlights" of the proposed legislation:

• Ban on corporations from spending money on U.S. elections if they have a foreign ownership of 20% or more, a majority of their board of directors is foreign principals, or if "their decision-making with respect to political activities falls under the direction or control of a foreign entity, including a foreign government."
• Ban on government contractors and TARP recipients from spending money on elections.
• Stand-By-Your-Ad: Force the CEO of a corporation spending money on a political ad to "approve" the message at the end of the ad. (eg. I'm Bill Gates and I approve this message.)
• In order to prevent corporations from "funneling money through shell groups," the legislation will require the top funder of an advertisement to stand-by-the-ad. It will also require the listing of the top five contributors to the organization for political purposes to appear on the screen at the end of the advertisement.
• The legislation also proposes several disclosure requirements by corporations to the FEC:
  • Requirements for separate spending accounts of money raised and spent on "political activities."
  • All donors, amounts, and spending from these accounts would be reported directly to the FEC.
  • Information on the candidate being supported or opposed through the expenditures must be reported.
  • Listing of all political expenditures by a corporation on their website within 24 hours.
  • Political expenditures disclosed to shareholders on a quarterly-basis.
• Additional disclosure requirements for lobbyists.
• A proposal that would allow a candidate (or political party or party committee) to "receive the lowest unit rate for the media market," when a "corporation buys airtime to run ads . . . that support or oppose" the candidate. "Broadcasters must also ensure that the candidate or political entity has reasonable access to airtime." (Think Fairness Doctrine, only for political advertising.)
• Increased restrictions on coordination between corporations and candidates or parties.

Please click here for a full summary from Rep. Van Hollen's website. Please click here for their press conference announcing the proposals. 

The RNLA will withhold on editorializing on these proposals until a later date. Congressional Republicans have also yet to formally reply. However, as a preview, the RNLA has some serious reservations about many of these proposals. The constitutionality of many of the proposals are in doubt, and if the bill is passed as it is proposed, several will surely be litigated. (Of course, most of these regulations will likely still be in place for the 2010 elections.) Some of these proposals also duplicate existing law. If you are interested in specific criticism, please visit the Center for Competitive Politics for their initial reaction to the Schumer-Van Hollen proposals.

Judging by the Democrats' demagoguery on Citizens United, the chances that the legislation will be aggressively pushed are high. As Politico reports, part of President Obama's new strategy is to "replace change with reform." "A top administration official said that 'the biggest piece of reform' will be supporting congressional efforts to limit the impact of the Citizens United Supreme Court ruling…." The White House has undoubtedly taken notice that recent public opinion polls show that the Citizens United decision was unpopular with the American public. After several months of pushing unpopular legislation like health care and cap and trade, Democrats are looking for a political winner. They think they have one.