Dems to Introduce Bill in Response to "Citizens United" Tomorrow.

[Clio the Leo]

Dem Response To Citizens United To Have More GOP Support, Source Says

It’s getting lost in the noise over financial reg reform. But the looming fight over the Dem legislative response to the Citizens United decision will be a big, possibly defining, story.

And here’s an interesting little nugget about it: The bill that Dems are planning will have more bipartisan support than expected, a Dem leadership aide confirms.

The legislation is going to be introduced tomorrow by Dem Rep Chris Van Hollen and GOP Rep Mike Castle, the source says, and it is likely to ignite a battle over the influence of corporate and other outside money over our politics. Coming in response to the Supreme Court decision, the legislative battle could play into a larger battle for the mantle of populism heading into the midterm elections.

The legislation seeks to increase transparency and disclosure of political spending, including provisions forcing heads of organizations spending big money on elections to reveal their personal involvement. It also seeks to prevent foreign money from influencing elections, and ensures that recipients of Federal money — contractors, TARP recipients — can’t spend cash in elections.

Republicans have attacked the initiative as an effort to game the Congressional elections. They have pointed out that chief sponsor Van Hollen also heads the DCCC, and that its chief driver in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, used to head the DSCC.

But a Dem leadership aide says it will be introduced tomorrow with at least one more GOP sponsor in addition to Mike Castle, though the aide wouldn’t reveal who. This will allow Dems to push back by pointing out that the measure has GOP support.

http://theplumline.whorunsgov.com/house-republicans/dem-response-to-citizens-united-to-have-more-gop-support-source-says/

[fugop]

1. Castle, eh?

Isn't that the Delaware rep running for Biden's Senate seat? Well well well. Is he looking to polish up his "I'm a moderate Republican! Really!" credentials?

[ruggerson]

2. This is just as, if not more important than a financial reform package

[kirby]

3. Some Repukes will support it under the banner of anti-Union n/t

[Manifestor_of_Light]

4. Lawyer with popcorn here......

:popcorn:

This will get damned interesting in light of the fact that it is legislation attempting to overturn a Supremes decision. When usually Case Law is what overturns Statute Law.

[marybourg]

5. Certainly not a full frontal assault, however. nt.

[xchrom]

6. Not a lawyer - but indeed this

makes watching the results interesting.

[NYC Liberal]

7. It's not so much overturning as it is doing everything but.

In other words, banning it for all companies receiving any federal money, requiring a serious amount of disclosure, etc.