Der erstaunliche Sinneswandel in der Frage der Wahlkampffinanzierungsreform, den Steny Hoyer, der Whip der Demokraten im Repr\u00e4sentantenhaus von Maryland, diese Woche vollzogen hat, st\u00e4rkt tats\u00e4chlich die Argumente f\u00fcr eine Pr\u00e4sidentenverordnung, die die Offenlegung aller politischen Ausgaben staatlicher Auftragnehmer vorschreibt, erkl\u00e4rte Common Cause heute.<\/p>
\"The turnabout of Mr. Hoyer, who was for transparency before he turned against it this week, reminds us of why it's so important that voters know whose money is behind our elected officials,\" said Bob Edgar, president and CEO of the nonpartisan government watchdog group. <\/p>
\"By scrutinizing Mr. Hoyer's donor lists, which are laden with the names of corporate political committees and the executives of firms doing business with the government, we can put his `change-of-heart' in context,\" Edgar said.<\/p>
As recently as last June, when he spoke on the House floor in support of the DISCLOSE Act, Hoyer argued that disclosure of corporate political giving would \"restore the confidence of voters that they will know who's spending much money to influence their votes, their opinion, their actions.\" Now, he argues that disclosure will stifle the free speech rights of corporate donors. <\/p>
\"Mr. Hoyer had it right the first time,\" Edgar said. \"Voters need to be able to 'consider the source,' when they watch television commercials supporting or attacking political candidates. His colleagues in Congress, constituents in Maryland and President Obama should 'consider the source' now as they weigh Hoyer's arguments against disclosure.<\/p>
\"Common Cause defers to no one in our reverence for the First Amendment and the freedoms it protects,\" Edgar added, \"but the argument that disclosure of corporate political giving impinges on free speech is ridiculous. \"Eight of nine justices on the Supreme Court have pronounced disclosure requirements constitutional. We have laws in place to ensure that contracts are awarded on merit and there are armies of well-paid corporate lawyers ready to file suit at any suggestion that a company has lost a government contract because it gave to the 'wrong' candidate.<\/p>
\"This controversy isn't about free speech; it's about a determined effort by some in Congress to help the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and some corporate leaders hide behind the First Amendment while they attempt to buy our elections. President Obama should issue the disclosure order immediately.\"<\/p>
Die Aussch\u00fcsse f\u00fcr Kleinunternehmen und Aufsicht sowie Regierungsreform des Repr\u00e4sentantenhauses haben f\u00fcr Donnerstag, 13.30 Uhr, in Raum 2154 des Rayburn House Office Building eine Anh\u00f6rung zur vorgeschlagenen Transparenzverordnung anberaumt.<\/p>"}}]},"yoast_head":"\n