Obama to bypass Congress to sign Disclose Act into law?

[werepossum]

I went ahead and updated it for ya.

Of course the shortsighted always forget that at some point - 5, 10, 20 years from now - the "other side" is going to be in power and those policies they put in place to hurt the other side will come back to bite them in the butt.

But the left owns the mainstream media, which will happily ignore a couple decades of the left doing something before going pure harpy mode decrying the right for doing the same. I don't think this will hurt the left when the dog rolls over and the Pubbies are on top.

Seriously though, most large corporations already heed your advice and donate to both parties. Microsoft proved that in our nation, you get just as much justice as you buy.

 

[Fern]

-snip-
All Obama might do is "require anyone submitting bids for government work to disclose two years' worth of political contributions and expenditures. The order would apply if the total exceeded $5,000 to a given recipient during a given year."

I think the potential for abuse is quite obvious.

I have no hard objection to disclosure of political donations. But tying bids for government work to disclosure looks very very bad to me. The two should be seperate, because whether or not a company is awarded a bid should be seperate from their donations and based on fators such as price and experience.

And given we're heading into election season the optics on this are horrible.

Fern

 

[Jhhnn]

If that were the case then why does the executive branch want to know who donated to who? If it is irrelevant and wont matter in the end due to competitive bids. Why collect the data at all?

Heh. Because the Right is all over the idea of accountability, until they're called upon to have some themselves.

This isn't about contracts at all, but about politics. Righties just toss in the whole thing about contracts as a red herring.

Given that a Republican minority filibustered the measure in the Senate, Obama can't really extend the idea as far as it really should go, but only to entities having govt contracts.

I'm all for people standing up for what they believe in- I'm also for them owning it, too. We live in a world where you can have all the political free speech you can pay for, and demanding anonymity, particularly from extremely wealthy donors, is utterly dishonest and pretty much cowardly.

Got something to say? Say it! Just don't act like it was somebody else who did...