Randy Demmer for Congress - Walz’s Transparency Rhetoric Rings Hollow on DISCLOSE Act

Congressional candidate State Representative Randy Demmer today released an additional statement on the DISCLOSE Act following comments made by Congressman Walz and new information about specific provisions now included in the bill:

“In a response to my statement urging him to vote against the DISCLOSE Act, Congressman Tim Walz attempts to link opposition to these onerous, costly, and unconstitutional new regulations to support for Wall Street and complicity in the financial collapse, and argues he’s only interested in transparency. Once again, Walz’s rhetoric doesn’t match up with the actual content of the legislation he’s supporting.

Many organizations opposed to the DISCLOSE Act – groups like the National Rifle Association (NRA) and National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB), and the thousands of small businesses, entrepreneurs, and individual citizens they represent – had nothing to do with our financial crisis, and nothing to do with Wall Street’s irresponsible behavior. These organizations oppose the DISCLOSE Act because the reporting requirement exemptions it contains actually add to the power of special interests – for groups that are on the "correct" side of the political spectrum, or that are useful in certain swing districts.

Now, as the bill inches closer to the House floor, details on a new backroom deal have emerged, which would exempt from reporting requirements any transfers between affiliated entities – including individuals rather than just organizations – up to $50,000. So much for Walz’s arguments for transparency. Unions would now be permitted to shift unlimited amounts of money around through various affiliated entities, without having to report a single detail on any of the transactions.

It’s now clear that this bill was never about disclosure, transparency or the need for voters to know who is spending money on elections. This is about Tim Walz and his colleagues attempting an end-run around the Constitution in order to muzzle critical voices in a brazen and last-ditch attempt to save their own skin.”