I have an idea II

Re yesterday's "I have an idea" post, about the House compromise with NRA backers. Here's a quote from Senator Dianne Feinstein.

I strongly oppose any special exemption for the National Rifle Association in the DISCLOSE Act. The purpose of this bill is to make sure that elected representatives are not beholden to special interests, yet here is special interest # 1 receiving a deal to exempt it from an otherwise very good bill.

This is bad policy. The law should apply to the NRA, just like any other group. If the NRA, or any similar group, is going to spend millions on political ads, the American public has a right to know who is funding them.

The bill is the DISCLOSE Act, not the 'Everyone Except the NRA DISCLOSE Act.'

The NRA claims they need an exemption to protect their First Amendment rights, but that argument simply doesn't hold up. The Supreme Court has stated clearly that although all are free to speak and advocate their positions, when a group runs ads for and against candidates, disclosure requirements are appropriate.

If Feinstein is joined by all Republicans in opposing the bill, it will doom the whole thing.

Dilemma: this special exemption for the most powerful special interest may be the only way to get an otherwise good bill passed. Is it worth it? What message does such a craven pandering to get votes send?

Ralph