Tag search result

Saying "the justices were in error," Democratic state lawmakers will introduce House and Senate resolutions Thursday to express opposition to the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United.

The ruling established that corporations and unions could make unlimited independent campaign expenditures. Critics are seeking a federal constitutional amendment to  declare that such donations are not free speech, as the court found.

Rep. Verla Insko, a Chapel Hill Democrat and lead sponsor of HR 1201, said the ruling is a "true threat to democracy." With the resolution, North Carolina joins more than two dozen other states to consider legislation or resolutions opposing the Citizens United decision. 

A leading advocate for a constitutional amendment to overturn the Citizens United decision will speak Monday at William Peace University.

Jeffrey Clements, the author of "Corporations are Not People," will give an address at 7 p.m. in the Jones Lecture Hall. Common Cause North Carolina and the university's law school are hosting the talk.

Clements writes on his blog that North Carolina Congressmen Walter Jones, a Republican, and David Price, a Democrat, are supporters of the effort to nullify the U.S. Supreme Court ruling and abolish so-called super PACs.

Republican Sen. Richard Burr was criticized Tuesday for voting against Democratic-backed legislation requiring disclosure of who pays for political advertising.

The Senate voted 57-41, on a procedural hurdle meant to move  The Disclose Act forward. The tally was short of the needed 60 votes, Rob Christensen reports.

The bill would require corporate as well as union and advocacy group leaders to disclose their names in campaign ads rather than allow so-called front groups to take responsibility for the political advertising.

“Washington's broken and a big part of the problem is the avalanche of special interest money which threatens to overwhelm the voices of the American people,” Marshall said in a statement.

"Senator Burr and I have to stand by our ads; big corporations and special interests should have to stand by theirs,'' she said. “I don't see how any reasonable person would have a problem with that.”

The Burr campaign issued a statement saying the senator supports “a campaign finance system that is open and transparent and does not favor one group over another. Unfortunately, the Disclose Act fails this test.”

The Burr campaign said that even the American Civil Liberties Union said that the bill would not improve the integrity of campaigns while harming free speech.

'This bill was thrown together with purely political motives, and, ironically, was backed with back room deals in an effort to buy votes,” said Samantha Smith, Burr's campaign spokeswoman. “It is nothing more than a blatant attempt by the Democrat campaign committees to silence critics and opponents of their big government, big spending agenda."

The bill meant to change the state's election law to comply with a U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing corporate expenditures sparked a fierce partisan debate in the Senate.

The bill strikes the parts of the state law that prohibited corporate and union election expenditures. Those prohibitions are now unconstitutional. The bill also requires corporations and unions to disclose their activities.

First, Sen. Neal Hunt, a Wake County Republican, moved to exempt nonprofit, 501(c)3 corporations from the requirement, since as Hunt said such corporations are prohibited by federal law from engaging in electioneering.

Sen. Dan Clodfelter said that amendment would give nonprofit corporations a license to break the law since they wouldn't have to disclose any information about their illegal electioneering.

Sen. Clark Jenkins, a Tarboro Democrat, raised the stakes with a substitute amendment that lowered the threshold for electronically reporting expenditures from $10,000 to $5,000. That amendment passed, which not only shot down Hunt's effort, but made the requirement tougher on nonprofits.

Other Republican amendments failed until Sen. David Hoyle, a Gaston County Democrat moved to cut off debate.

"We've had enough of this," Hoyle said.

The bill cleared the Senate 28-18.

UPDATE: Post corrects that the lower threshold refers to requirements for filing disclosures electronically.

LEGISLATORS UNITED: The U.S. Supreme Court blasted a hole in North Carolina's election law, and the state House and Senate are working to patch it. (N&O)

DO YOU SWEAR...Reuben Young, once the chief legal adviser for former Gov. Mike Easley, must sit down with lawyers representing several media outlets and be interviewed under oath about whether e-mail messages about public business were ordered to be destroyed while Easley was in office. (N&O)

One of the last bills the legislature may tackle this session is the state's response to the U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United case.

In that case, the court struck down federal prohibitions on election speech by corporations and labor unions. The state's election law currently bans election expenditures by corporations.

The bill would strike the lines in state law that prohibit election expenditures by corporations and establishes disclosure and reporting rules for fundraising and expenses in those cases.

The Senate is expected to pick up the bill this afternoon and leaders in both chambers said they intend to tackle the issue before they adjourn the session.