June 24th, 2010
05:01 PM ET
4 years ago

House passes campaign finance legislation

 The U.S. House on Thursday passed a bill that would require most independent groups that pay for campaign ads to disclose their donors.
The U.S. House on Thursday passed a bill that would require most independent groups that pay for campaign ads to disclose their donors.

(CNN) - The U.S. House on Thursday passed a bill that would require most independent groups that pay for campaign ads to disclose their donors.

The measure passed on a 219-206 vote, with most Democrats in support and Republicans opposing. The Senate is considering taking up its own version of the bill.

Referred to as the "disclose act," the bill was pushed by House Democrats to respond to a Supreme Court ruling in January that struck down key provisions of campaign finance laws that restricted spending by corporations, unions and independent groups.


Filed under: Congress
soundoff (36 Responses)
  1. Steve- Illinois

    If it's such a great plan, why do the dems carve out the majority of their donors from the legislation?

    June 24, 2010 06:59 pm at 6:59 pm |
  2. George of the jungle

    Gee can you imagin that? The repos where against this bill. Hun wonder why. Maybe because They would have to be transparent. and we might just see Bp or exon or some other big company.

    June 24, 2010 07:37 pm at 7:37 pm |
  3. GI Joe

    They clear things that affect them, but not the things that affect us. shame shame shame.

    Vote out the party of NO.

    June 24, 2010 07:46 pm at 7:46 pm |
  4. Marty, AL

    These republicans are amazing, they all should be voted out of office come November.

    June 24, 2010 07:54 pm at 7:54 pm |
  5. Mesa Mick

    It's a new America we live in today people. Gone are the days of "government of the people, by the people and for the people".

    While middle class and working class Americans have been siding with the rethuglicants for the last three plus decades for so-called "family values" and voting against their pocketbooks, America has morphed into a nation that is "Governance OF the people, BY the corporations FOR the corporations".

    You asked for it now you got it...

    PS: No more swimming in the Gulf either – It's been polluted beyond recognition by the corporations that we signed the future of the US of A over to along time ago...

    June 24, 2010 07:59 pm at 7:59 pm |
  6. George of the jungle

    have you noticed that not many repos responding to this story. Gee we might see how big business backs these all for the rich guys.

    June 24, 2010 08:05 pm at 8:05 pm |
  7. Minnesotan

    Of course the Rethugs don't want transparency. It would allow everyone to see all the creepy crawly things under their corrupt rock.

    June 24, 2010 08:10 pm at 8:10 pm |
  8. David G

    Gee, when the Supreme Court ruled that large corporations could run unlimited ads for political candidates, most Republicans claim they were against it. But when it comes to laws to either limt ads, or disclosing who paid for the ads, the Republicans are totally against this. That's because they want to let large corporations to be able to buy their election. Republicans claim they want transarency, but actually want to be able to be totally corrupt. It figures. Go to mediamatters.org, and fact check the conservative media, mostly Cluster Fox, and see how they LIE & DISTORT the TRUTH.

    June 24, 2010 08:32 pm at 8:32 pm |
  9. DENNA

    The GOP opposed it, huh? Then it MUST be a good bill. I swear, the GOP opposes everything. They would oppose sunshine and flowers if they thought people wouldn't think they were crazy. To the Supreme – Checkmate! Stop being another arm of the Rethuglican party and just follow the law.

    June 24, 2010 08:41 pm at 8:41 pm |
  10. Jeff Spangler

    Unconstitutional under the First Amendment and Equal Protection. Why bother passing such tripe? Because they can't pass what's really needed for an over-the-hill country going to economic and social Hell.

    June 24, 2010 08:47 pm at 8:47 pm |
  11. Aaron

    Were the Repubs just feigning outrage over the Supremes politically-motivated decision back in January? They seemed pretty outraged back then.

    June 24, 2010 09:03 pm at 9:03 pm |
1 2