Last week, we launched the web site - Pass223.com - to get support in the Senate for S. 223, a bill to require electronic filing of campaign finance reports. So far, there have been 338 calls to Senate offices asking senators to both support the bill and oppose the poison pill Ensign amendment. The comments coming back from our callers have been very helpful including some information on new support for the bill that we will be double checking soon. We still need your help in identifying supporters of the bill and opponents of the Ensign amendment. Please go to Pass223.com and call your senators.

One comment I’d like to pass on came from multiple callers to the office of Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland. According to Mikulski’s legislative aide, the senator is opposed to the Ensign amendment and would not vote for S. 223 were the amendment attached. From the comments:

He said she would oppose (vote against) the Ensign amendment, since it is an obvious poison pill effort to derail the bill, and that she would not vote for the bill if the Ensign amendment survived as part of the bill. Better to try again than allow gutted legislation to pass. - Andrew May, 08.06.08 @ 11:29 AM

I pressed and he said she was councerned about the “poison pill” amendment and wouldn’t vote for it were that amendment a part of it. - 08.06.08 @ 01:08 PM

These comments clearly show that the Ensign amendment is a poison pill designed to hurt the chances of passing S. 223. We need to identify more senators like Sen. Mikulski.

We still need your help in calling Senate offices. There are over 20 offices for which we have no comments. Please take the time to give your senator a call today. Go to Pass223.com.

0 Comments

Today, the Sunlight Foundation launched a new web site, Pass223.com, to harness the distributed power of the Internet to pressure the Senate into increasing disclosure of campaign contributions by passing a bill - S. 223, the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act - requiring senators to file their contribution reports electronically.

We need your help to pass this bill. Please follow the link to Pass223.com and call your senators to find out where they stand on S. 223. The site has full instructions on who your senators are, how to call, what to say, and how to report back to us. For more detail on the bill, keep reading.

Currently, presidential candidates and candidates running for the House of Representatives file their campaign contributions in electronic form. Electronic filing speeds the process by which campaign contribution data reaches the public over the Internet, allowing citizens and journalists to more easily spot a conflict of interest or an inappropriate contribution. Filers in the Senate do not file electronically, delaying disclosure by weeks and possibly months.

Passage of S. 223 appears to be a “no-brainer,” and isn’t publicly opposed by any senator. However, at every step of the way over the past year and a half the bill has been interrupted and blocked for a variety of reasons.

Right now, Sen. John Ensign (pronounced en-sen) is blocking the bill by insisting on adding a poison pill amendment. This poison pill is meant to protect senators from legitimate ethics complaints filed by outside groups. The amendment would impose an unconstitutional burden on on charities, religious organizations and other nonprofits by forcing them to disclose their donors when they file ethics complaints against sitting senators. Ensign’s amendment is opposed by a group of non-profits, religious groups, and charities from the right and the left.

For S. 223 to pass, Ensign’s amendment must be defeated. And to do that, we need you help in identifying senators who OPPOSE Ensign and SUPPORT S. 223. This is a great chance to help pass a long overdue bill.

Go to Pass223.com and get started calling your senators (remember, you have two of them). Don’t forget to report back so that we know where these senators stand on increasing campaign finance disclosure.

Pass223.com is a joint project of the Sunlight Foundation, Public Citizen, Public Campaign, Center for Responsive Politics, Campaign Finance Institute, Change Congress, and Open the Government.

3 Comments

We’ve expended enormous energy and blog space to advocate for the Senate to file their campaign finance reports electronically, something that probably shouldn’t take that much effort, but it does. If you need a primer on the issue you can watch this video we made. One thing of note in this whole saga is that Congress, in 1999, mandated electronic filing for all campaign committees, but somehow the Senate doesn’t have to comply. Why is this?

In December of 1995, Congress passed a bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act to allow the FEC to accept electronic filing, a legislative recommendation previously made by the FEC to give them a statutory requirement and funding to create an e-filing system. The bill, which became Public Law 104-79, also changed the filing location for members of the House from the Clerk of the House to the FEC. This seems innocuous, but it is important.

In 1999, the FY2000 appropriations bill for the Treasury Department, the Executive Office of the President, and other agencies included campaign financing amendments, the 1999 FECA amendments. The 1999 FECA amendments mandated electronic filing of campaign finance reports for all campaign committees who raise a certain amount of money to be determined by the FEC. How did the Senate avoid e-filing? With this sneaky exemption provision defining the meaning of the word "report":

"(D) As used in this paragraph, the ‘term’ report means, with respect to the Commission, a report, designation, or statement required by this Act to be filed with the Commission."

The key words here are "to be filed with the Commission". Due to the 1995 bill (Public Law 104-79) the House was required to file with the Commission. The Senate, however, still files with the Secretary of the Senate who then proceeds to file them on behalf of Senators with the Commission. Thus, according to the statutory basis for e-filing, Senators do not file "reports" because they do not file with the Commission. Hopefully, they decide to change this silliness.

0 Comments

For the past year, the Sunlight Foundation has worked to get a bill passed that would require Senators to file their campaign finance contribution reports electronically, allowing that information to be more readily available before elections than it is now. Passage of the bill has been blocked by Republicans, specifically Sen. John Ensign, for this same amount of time. We aren’t going to give up on our fight to get S. 223 passed and intend to keep the pressure on this year. To kick things off we’ve made this video to explain the issue and keep the attention on Sen. Ensign and his unreasonable hold on the bipartisan bill:

Now that you’ve watched the video you can follow the instructions and call Sen. Ensign’s office and tell him to drop his objection to the bill. Here’s his number: 202-224-6244.

If you happen to live in Nevada and want to show your opposition to Ensign’s objection to the bill in person, Common Cause is planning on holding a press conference at Ensign’s Reno office on Monday. For more information contact us through this contact form: http://www.sunlightfoundation.com/contactus.

Senator Ensign has no other motive in this other than to block passage of S. 223. He does not want citizens to have timely access to campaign contributor information. This kind of attitude cannot be allowed in Washington anymore.

0 Comments

Sen. John Ensign continues to block the campaign finance electronic filing bill that Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Russ Feingold have been attempting to pass all year. The bill, which the Sunlight Foundation has fought hard to get passed, has 41 cosponsors including 16 Republicans (including Sens. Bob Bennett, Lamar Alexander, and John Cornyn among others). Despite this not being a partisan issue, Ensign insists on blocking consideration of the bill by offering an irrelevant and controversial amendment, which initially came from the offices of Sen. Mitch McConnell, to require outisde groups filing ethics complaints to disclose their funding sources. This has been noted as unconstitutional law and is an absurd requirement to demand.

Is the Senate Ethics Committee truly overburdened with cases? Sen. Ensign says that complaints in the Senate can be written "on a beverage napkin or written in crayon." I’m not sure what number of ethics complaints are submitted by drunks and children (or some combination of the two) but it can’t be that high. In fact, the only known ongoing Senate Ethics Committee investigation was started by the Senate Republicans when they filed a complaint against Sen. Larry Craig for pleading guilty to possibly, maybe, perhaps being gay. Ellen just linked to a list of potential ethical issues facing a number of Republican Senators that could be investigated. If outside groups can file these complaints so easily - in crayon and on a beverage napkin - why isn’t the Ethics Committee investigating anything?

Sen. Ensign’s implacable resolve to deny easy public access to campaign finance information appears to be working to keep the public in the dark about the money he and other Senators, like Sen. Mitch McConnell, will be raising this election season. Thanks to Sen. Ensign the public will have less access to vital information about who is funding Senate campaigns. I’m sure those contributors will raise a toast at the next fundraiser Ensign hosts.

If only submitting earmarks were as easy as Ensign claims it is to submit an ethics complaint. I’d get my set of Crayolas and sit down with a bar napkin to set aside some funds to study gas capture technology in the U.S. Senate. They do it for cows.

0 Comments

Going on eight months now the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act, requiring senators to file their campaign finance reports electronically, has been held up by proceedural maneuvers from the Republican side. After a series of secret holds placed on the bill were thwarted once secret holds were banned (Senators with secret holds must reveal their identity after 72 hours) Sen. John Ensign blocked the bill by offering a poison pill amendment that lacked relevance to the bill. Ensign’s amendment, revealed on this blog to have originated from the offices of Mitch McConnell, requires outside organizations filing ethics complaints to reveal their donor list. For months now, this irrelevant, poison pill amendment has blocked a simple change in how Senators file their campaign finance reports that would help make the data more readily accessible to the voting public. Now a coalition of groups, including a number of conservative groups, has formed to ask Ensign to drop his amendment and allow the electronic filing bill to pass. The groups include:

Alliance for Justice
Americans for the Preservation of Liberty
The American Conservative Union
James Bopp Jr., General Counsel James Madison Center for Free Speech
Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest
The Free Speech Coalition
Gun Owners of America,
National Center for Public Policy Research
OMB Watch

The full letter is after the jump.

November 9, 2007

The Honorable Harry Reid
528 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

The Honorable Mitch McConnell
361-A Russell Senate Office Building
Washington, DC 20510

Re: Drop Retaliatory Ensign Amendment to S. 223

Dear Senators Reid and McConnell,

We are writing as nonprofit organizations to ask you to defeat an amendment proposed by Senator John Ensign of Nevada to S. 223, the Senate Campaign Disclosure Parity Act. It would require any charity, religious organization or civic group that files an ethics complaint against a Senator or a Senate campaign to disclose donors that give more than $5,000.

This proposal is a clear attempt to intimidate the public from seeking enforcement of Senate ethics rules. Its unmistakable purpose is to discourage organizations from taking action to keep government accountable. Its retaliatory nature is counter to donors’ privacy rights and the First Amendment rights of association and speech, and raises significant constitutional questions.

This proposal contravenes and runs counter to the letter and spirit of well-established tax law policies, rules and regulations protecting the identity of donors that were enacted in recognition of the Supreme Court’s decision in NAACP v. Alabama. If adopted, this provision would have the effect of changing existing tax law without the benefit of a full and open public debate, including involvement of Congressional tax-writing committees, and without a change in the Supreme Court’s decision.

Current law provides adequate information about any organization filing an ethics complaint. Any Senator can learn more about the organization by requesting disclosure of their IRS Form 990, which does not publicly identify donors, but does provide information on key leadership, finances and activities.

Civic participation in the United States most often occurs through nonprofit organizations. Individuals who want to influence public policy or hold government accountable know they can be more effective by joining and supporting such organizations. They do so with an expectation of privacy that was recognized by the Supreme Court.

We urge you to oppose the Ensign amendment.

Yours truly,

Alliance for Justice
Americans for the Preservation of Liberty
The American Conservative Union
James Bopp Jr., General Counsel James Madison Center for Free Speech
Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest
The Free Speech Coalition
Gun Owners of America,
National Center for Public Policy Research
OMB Watch

The following private companies also concur with this letter:
Eberle Communications Group, Inc.
Harbinger Communications Co., Inc.

cc: Sen. Max Baucus, Sen. Robert Bennett, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Sen. Thad Cochran,
Sen. John Cornyn, Sen. John Ensign, Sen. Russell Feingold, Sen. Dianne Feinstein,
Sen. Charles Grassley, Sen. John McCain

0 Comments

Matt Mosk of the Washington Post writes today about the stalled bill that would require Senators to file their campaign finance reports electronically, two days after I had a piece published in the Lexington Herald-Leader. Maybe we can light a spark?

0 Comments

Sen. John Ensign continues to transparently block the electronic filing bill by refusing to back down from a ridiculous amendment requiring outside groups filing ethics complaints to reveal their funding sources. In stating his refusal to yield Ensign also admitted that he is working with Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, the author of this absurd amendment, to block passage of the electronic filing bill. The Hill reports, "Ensign added that he consulted with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) before deciding on his strategy, deeming the push for the amendment ‘something we did together … we discussed it. I felt it was a good idea for me to do it.’" (Emphasis added.) McConnell has stated previously, including in the last few days, that he supports the electronic filing bill. It appears that he is being far less than honest.

Ensign and McConnell should do the senatorial thing and step out of the way as Sen. Bob Bennett did when he tried to offer a poison pill amendment. Rules Committee Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein has offered Ensign a fair hearing in her committee on his amendment in exchange for dropping his objection to electronic filing. It’s time for Ensign and McConnell to stop blocking transparency legislation.

In regards to the Ensign/McConnell amendment itself there are serious legal questions that appear to make it and illegal attempt to infringe on certain groups’ privacy. Adam Bonin summarized the legal issues yesterday in a post at Daily Kos:

What can we say about this proposal? Of course it’s not germane to this innocuous, bipartisan legislation, but what’s more is that it’s pretty blatantly unconstitutional. In a series of cases from the civil rights era including NAACP v Alabama and Bates v. City of Little Rock, the Supreme Court has made clear that such compelled disclosure – or "outing" – of supporters of a political organization is anathema to democracy, as it subjects members to potential harassment or retaliation and infringes on their constitutional rights of association, and must be supported by a compelling state interest.

Tell Ensign and McConnell to stop blocking transparency.

Sen. John Ensign: (202) 224-6244

Sen. Mitch McConnell: (202) 224-2541

0 Comments

On Monday, S. 223, the Senate electronic filing bill was blocked for a third time, this time by Sen. John Ensign who offered an amendment that would require outside organizations filing ethics complaints to disclose their funding sources. This non-germane amendment did not originate from Ensign’s offices.

Sunlight has learned that last week Democratic offices were given a Unanimous Consent agreement that would have allowed the Senate to move to S. 223 only if they agreed to take up a an amendment identical to the one introduced on Monday by Senator John Ensign. The consent agreement came from none other than the offices of Sen. Mitch McConnell, whom the Sunlight Foundation has targeted as a culprit in covering up the identity of the anonymous Senators previously blocking the bill. That the “McConnell amendment” is now being offered by Senator Ensign comes as no surprise to long time McConnell watchers, who are well aware that when it comes to reform, McConnell is often hiding behind the scenes, pulling all the strings. .

The document shows that the effort to block S. 223 originates not from the offices of Sen. Ensign but from the Minority Leader’s office. So, McConnell wasn’t hiding the identity of a fellow senator, he was hiding himself!

0 Comments

Moments ago Sens. Russ Feingold and Dianne Feinstein attempted to pass S.223, the Senate electronic filing bill, and were blocked by Sen. John Ensign who objected and attempted to offer a poison pill amendment. This is the third time the bill has been blocked by the Republican side although this is the first time that the hold was not anonymous. We now know that Sen. John Ensign is the one blocking this "no-brainer" bill that would simply require senators to file their campaign finance reports electronically. Sen. Ensign has some nerve opposing a bill that has near unanimous public support and which would simply move the Senate into the 20th century. Now that we know what McConnell was hiding I have to ask what is Ensign, the director of the National Republican Senate Committee, hiding in those campaign finance documents.

0 Comments