WASHINGTON — CORRECTION: Outside groups spent $446,574 against Lt. Gov. Bill Halter, a Democrat, in his unsuccessful challenge in the Arkansas U.S. Senate race, according to the Sunlight Foundation, a Washington group that advocates openness in government. The wrong figure was used in an article in Friday’s newspaper about campaign funding.
For the second time in two months, Senate Republicans blocked a Democratic bill that would have required corporations and unions to disclose their involvement in political advertisements.
Campaign funding from outside groups, that typically receive union and corporate support, has seen a spike this year, according to election observers, particularly in the Arkansas senatorial race, which has attracted more independent funding than any other campaign, according to Federal Election Commission reports tabulated by the Sunlight Foundation, a Washington group whose website says “uses the power of the Internet to catalyze greater government openness.”
On a procedural vote of 59-39, the bill fell short of the 60 votes needed to proceed to a final vote on the legislation. In July, the vote was 57-41. Each vote fell along party lines, with Arkansas’ two Democratic senators, Blanche Lincoln and Mark Pryor voting in favor.
The bill, called the Democracy is Strengthened by CastingLight on Spending in Elections, or DISCLOSE Act, would have required on-air disclosures by political groups of the corporations or unions funding the advertisements. It also would have required unions and corporations to report all political spending to the Federal Election Commission.
The bill was offered in response to the January Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Elections Commission in which a 5-4 majority of the court ruled that a ban on the use of general treasury funds for political ads by unions and corporations was unconstitutional.
The bill’s goal was “saving jobs of Democratic politicians,” said Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican.
He criticized Democrats for bringing up the bill a second time, saying there were more pressing matters, such as creating jobs, that needed to be addressed. He said the bill would enforce stricter requirements for corporations, traditional Republican allies, than it would for labor unions, which traditionally back Democratic candidates.
“This is a completely distasteful exercise,” he said. Democrats “want to prevent their critics from speaking out about what they’ve done.”
No one would be silenced, Democrats replied.
“Disclosure doesn’t chill speech,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Chuck Schumer of New York.
In response to Republican criticism that the bill was targeting the current election, Schumer said Democrats were willing to postpone its enactment until January. He said Democrats were willing to accept Republican amendments to “pare this bill down.”
“It’s clear the money is flowing,” said Schumer. “We just aren’t permitted to know who it is coming from.”
Corporations have used the Citizens United decision to hide political involvement behind “no-name” organizations, said Arkansas’ Pryor. He cited advertisements that ran during the health-care debate that were against the health-care overhaul, that were funded by insurance companies without disclosing that in the ad.
“When you add it up,” Pryor said, the Citizens United decision has benefited Republicans more than Democrats.”
Republicans countered that unions would benefit more if the DISCLOSE Act passed. Sen. Robert Bennett of Utah said that if corporations had to reveal their political involvement, they risk alienating their customer base. Unions, which he said are more politically inclined, would not be inhibited.
“They don’t worry about selling their products to the American public,” he said.
In a statement, Lincoln said the legislation wasn’t perfect “but it would prevent organizations from hiding behind shadow groups and masking their campaign expenditures from the voting public.”
When a similar measure passed in the House in June, U.S. Rep. John Boozman, who is challenging Lincoln in November’s general election, was the only member of the Arkansas delegation to oppose it.
Republicans and members of business groups said the bill treated corporations more harshly than it did organized labor because it would have required corporations to reveal donors of $600 or more. It would have required that political ads disclose, on the air, donors who had given $10,000 or more to pay for the ads, and itwould have barred companies with at least 20 percent foreign ownership and government contractors from contributing.
Critics said those aspects of the bill gave unions an advantage because the membership dues that often go toward paying for ads are often below the $600 threshold and that union organizations aren’t government contractors and don’t have the international reach of many corporations.
The U.S. Senate race in Arkansas has attracted more money from outside advocacy groups than any other race in the current midterm election cycle, according to the Sunlight Foundation.
In total, outside groups spent $7,697,133 on the Arkansas race between Jan. 1 and Aug. 30.
Of that, Lincoln attracted $443,732 in support of her candidacy, and $2,437,540 in opposition.
Boozman attracted $100,173 in support of his candidacy and $24,500 in opposition.
Lincoln’s challenger in the Democratic primary, Lt. Gov. Bill Halter, received $4,245,630 in support of his candidacy and $24,500 in opposition.
Nationally, the group reported that independent expenditures have totaled $57 million so far, outstripping the $35 million spent in 2006, the year of the previous midterm elections.
The group did not provide a specific breakdown, but reported that union spending has increased and that there is “no indication” that corporate funding has been unleashed.
In his primary and runoff bid, Halter received support from unions, including the AFL-CIO’s political affiliate, Working America, and the Service Employees International Union.
In an interview Thursday, Halter said that voters viewing favorable ads about him funded by those groups understood the motivation behind them, because the union involvement was clear.
He contended that other groups, including Arkansans for Common Sense, allowed unknown donors to shield their identifies in the bid to defeat him. The Sunlight Foundation put the amount spent by those donors at $637,817.
“How can you know what the motivation of Arkansans for Common Sense is if you don’t know who’s funding them,” Halter said.
Front Section, Pages 3 on 09/24/2010