Need to Close the Door on DISCLOSE Again

The Supreme Court ruled earlier this year (in Citizens United vs. FEC) that company (and employee) voices were being unfairly silenced by the campaign finance rules that were in place. Democrats in Congress didn’t like what they heard so they attempted to make their way around the decision by coming up with the DISCLOSE Act. For those that care, the acronym (who has the job of coming up with these things) stands for Democracy is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections.

Fortunately, the effort fell short of the 60 Senate votes needed to proceed. But bad ideas (in this case one of the worst ones to come down the pike in a long time, and that’s saying something in a city filled with questionable policy proposals) don’t simply go away. Indiana Chamber members communicated their displeasure the first time around.

CongressDaily reports the latest:

The DISCLOSE Act will head back to the floor for a vote when the Senate returns next month, according to spokespeople for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and Sen. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., the bill’s lead sponsor.

The measure would implement strict disclosure laws on campaign ads, require corporate leaders to appear in ads much like candidates and severely restrict foreign-owned companies and those that do business with the government. 

Senate Dems and their reform-advocate allies are targeting Sens. Scott Brown, R-Mass., Olympia Snowe, R-Maine and Susan Collins, R-Maine, all of whom voted against cloture last month. The 3 GOPers said the bill was rushed in an attempt to influence the ’10 midterms on Dems’ behalf.

Now, though, reform advocates believe they have removed that most significant objection all 3 GOPers had. If the measure is passed in late Sept. or early Oct., it would not go into effect until after the midterms.

Senate leaders have told their House counterparts that they will bring the bill up again, and that they may let GOPers block it one more time in order to score political points. But after the bill fails, reform groups and senators who back the DISCLOSE Act will try to convince potential GOP allies to join them in passing the bill so it might be implemented after the midterms.

Still, Snowe, Collins and Brown will face pressure from their leader even after it becomes clear the bill wouldn’t impact the midterms. Senate Minority Leader McConnell has been a vocal opponent of the DISCLOSE Act, labeling it a ploy to benefit Dems. McConnell has been successful in keeping his conference together on most controversial votes, making the bill’s prospects uncertain.

Dems also have to deal with Sens. Dianne Feinstein , D-Calif., and Frank Lautenberg , D-N.J., both of whom are opposed to a carve-out that exempts the NRA from certain disclosure provisions. Holman said there is an understanding that the 2 Dems would vote for cloture, getting Dems over the 60 votes required to move the bill to final passage, but then Lautenberg and Feinstein could vote against the final package. Lautenberg and Feinstein both voted for cloture when the bill first came up on July 27.

Not Enough Time on Their Hands in D.C.?

Quirky Congressional calendars and policy stalemates are nothing new in Washington. For those of that mindset, it appears the rest of 2010 won’t be too upsetting. And with some of the damage Congress has inflicted on businesses of all sizes and their employees over the last few years, maybe that isn’t all bad.

In the House (which doesn’t return until Tuesday), it’s less than three weeks until the August break (starting a week earlier than normal). House members will not be back in Washington until mid-September, with a targeted adjournment date of October 8 in order to hit the campaign trail fulltime in the weeks leading up to the November 2 election. Are we looking at a lame-duck session in November or December — or no action on major items until 2011?

For the Senate, the legislative backlog includes:

  • Seeking two votes (Scott Brown and Olympia Snowe are the top targets) to move the financial regulatory reform conference report
  • A lending pool/tax incentives increase for small businesses, which was originally seen as an opportunity to address other financial issues — including the expiring Bush tax cuts from 2001 and 2003
  • A $75 billion war supplemental that faces a White House veto over issues unrelated to the original intent. The House added $16 billion, including $10 billion to local school districts to help avoid teacher layoffs. Part of the offsets feature recissions in education programs (among them Race to the Top); hence, the White House opposition

CongressDaily reports the following on that bill:

Senate Appropriations Chairman Daniel Inouye did not include funding for teachers in the measure the Senate approved in May because it was unclear if there was enough support to pass the bill. 

Supporters of the teacher funding will also have to overcome opposition from a group of 13 Democratic senators led by Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., who called the proposed cuts to education programs "unacceptable" in a letter to Inouye earlier this month.

"Choosing between preserving teacher jobs and supporting vital education reforms is a false choice and would set a dangerous precedent," the letter said.

Or school districts could utilize any number of other cost reduction methods instead of simply cutting teachers. If only that suggestion would become part of the common practice.

Many Placing Their Money on House GOP Surge

Many, but not all, were surprised when Massachusetts Rep. Scott Brown earned the special election victory earlier this year to replace Ted Kennedy. The same group that called that upset also predicted President Obama’s electoral vote total nearly a month before the 2008 election.

That same entity — Dublin, Ireland-based InTrade, an online futures market — now is giving House Republicans a 50-50 chance to reclaim control of their chamber in November.

On Tuesday, April 20 at 4:55 p.m., InTrade’s market for GOP control of the House hit 50.5, meaning traders believed there was a 50.5 percent chance the House would change hands in November. According to CongressDaily:

Analysts at the Wharton School of Business have pegged InTrade’s margin of error at 1 to 1.5 percent, or half that of comparable Gallup polls.

Although one or two major market-makers with deep pockets and an axe to grind can sometimes influence the betting, InTrade has proved to be accurate more often than not. That’s because traders are more likely to do their homework with actual money on the line than with a pollster’s voice on the line, Wharton professors and others argue.

At the close of trading in April 22, Democrats had only a 48.4 percent chance to retain the House. That chance has steadily declined throughout the year but only dropped below 50 percent this week. InTrade’s market for House Republicans picking up at least 35 seats hit 59.5 percent.

The Senate picture is brighter for Democrats, based on InTrade betting. The latest trading puts Senate Democrats’ chances at holding their majority at 77.9 percent. But the market for Republicans picking up at least seven seats stood at 50 percent. 

Was Social Media Prowess Key to Sen. Brown’s Bay State Victory?

By now you know the story. Scott Brown handily defeated the early favorite Martha Coakley in the race for the late Sen. Kennedy’s Senate seat. But a Wall Street Journal blog posts some interesting findings as to how, pointing to Brown’s use of social media as being an effective means of reaching the voting public:

A study conducted by the Emerging Media Research Council out today found that Brown had a more effective strategy of using social networking tools including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube to promote his campaign and connect with supporters.

Here’s a look at the numbers:

Facebook Posts since Jan. 1: Brown (128), Coakley (58)

Facebook Fans: Brown (70,800), Coakley (13,529)

Tweets since Jan. 1: Brown (142), Coakley (144)

Twitter Followers: Brown (9,679), Coakley (3,385)

YouTube Videos: Brown (57), Coakley (52)

YouTube Video Views: Brown (578,271), Coakley (51,173)

The study concludes that Brown’s use of social media helped in several ways, including boosting his name recognition both in and out of Massachusetts. They note that just 51% of Massachusetts voters had heard of Brown in a Nov. 12 poll, by Jan. 14 his name recognition was at 95%.

The study also found that Brown more openly embraced social media sites on his campaign Web site, where he “prominently” features social networking channels including a Twitter feed while Coakley “gives social networks less prominent real estate.