Disclose Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mrs. SHAHEEN. Mr. President, when I was home in New Hampshire over the recess, I had the opportunity, as I am sure the Presiding Officer did, to see all of the television ads that are being run by various candidates and special interest groups. Already--again, I am sure this is true in Minnesota and it is true across the country--because of the Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court, a decision many of my colleagues talked about earlier today, the airwaves in New Hampshire were flooded with ads from essentially anonymous, unaccountable special interests. I think the question we all should ask and certainly voters across this country should ask is, Who is really paying for these ads? Voters don't know. Sure, the ads give the special interest groups great mom-and-pop, apple pie-sounding names, but voters today have no way of knowing who is funding these groups and who is really putting up the money for these ads.

Personally, I think there is too much money being spent on elections these days. During the 1990s when I first ran for election in New Hampshire for the State senate and then for Governor, in New Hampshire we had a voluntary spending cap law. I think the law worked extremely well in limiting the amount of money candidates could raise and spend. Under our State law, a candidate who didn't want to voluntarily limit campaign spending had to obtain a certain number of signatures from voters or pay a higher fee to get on the ballot. And when that law was in effect, almost every candidate chose to abide by the voluntary spending limit. That had two very positive effects. First, candidates could spend less time raising money and more time talking to voters about the issues they faced. Second, a candidate needed to rely more on volunteers to help get their message out because they didn't have as much money to spend on ads and staff. You also became very efficient at how you spent your money--something that I think is helpful when you get into elective office. Now, unfortunately, New Hampshire's voluntary spending cap law was struck down in a decision very similar to the Citizens United Supreme Court decision.

When I look back at my three campaigns for the State senate in New Hampshire, I spent about $20,000 each time. Fast forward to today and the impacts of repealing that law by the Supreme Court in New Hampshire, and today candidates routinely raise and spend about five times that much. In my campaigns for Governor, I raised and spent about $1.25 million to $1.5 million based on what the campaign spending law was that year. Today, in New Hampshire, serious candidates for Governor raise and spend several times that amount.

Now, because of the Citizens United decision, we can no longer limit the amount of spending by special interests on Federal elections. But what we can still do and what we should do is require these anonymous groups to disclose who is funding their ads. That is exactly what the DISCLOSE Act does. It also prohibits foreign corporations from spending money to influence American elections.

I think unlimited election spending by anonymous groups and potentially foreign corporations poses a real threat to our democracy. This should be a bipartisan issue. For years, it was.

As the Presiding Officer knows, because I have heard him talk about this, back in 1997 the minority leader said--this is back in 1997, so over 10 years ago--that ``public disclosure of campaign contributions and spending should be expedited so voters can judge for themselves what is appropriate.''

Then just this spring, even after the Citizens United decision, Senator Cornyn, the Senator who is leading the Republicans' election efforts, told the Wall Street Journal:

I think the system needs more transparency so people can more easily reach their own conclusions.

I agree completely. If all the Senators who are on public record supporting disclosure of campaign contributions voted in support of the DISCLOSE Act, we would pass the DISCLOSE Act today by a wide bipartisan margin.

I hope, as our colleagues on the other side of the aisle think about the DISCLOSE Act and about what is happening to manipulate our elections in this country, that they will join me--and all of us who believe that the best way to make sure that our democracy remains strong and that we address how money is being spent in elections--in supporting the transparency and the accountability that is available to voters in the DISCLOSE Act.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. I yield the floor.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source