Campaign Finance Reform Bill Introduced in Minnesota to Bring Greater Disclosure of Corporate and Union Contributions
By: Mike Dean
April 27, 2010 
1 Comment
Tomorrow, Rep. Ryan Winkler will introduce legislation in the Minnesota legislature to require organizations (corporations and unions) that run independent expenditures to disclose the contributions and expenditures that they make. The announcement will be made at a press conference on Wednesday, April 28 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 125 of the State Capitol.
This legislation is being introduced to make Minnesota law compliant with the U.S. Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which came down earlier this year. This decision paves the way for corporations and unions to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaigns to elect or defeat candidates. The legislation introduced by Rep. Winkler goes a step further to require organizations (corporations or unions) to disclose who is contributing to these efforts and what expenditures they are making.
This legislation is necessary because the public has the right to know who is funding election speech in a timely manner. One of the ways that we can prevent corruption and undue influence is to bring campaign contributions into the sunlight. Without knowledge about who is funding political speech, the public cannot adequately evaluate the information and misinformation about candidates that results.
“…corporations or unions”–I get tired of never hearing about election reform without the inclusion of reference to unions.
It is time that some of us grow enough testicular tissue to come out and tell the truth. The truth is that unions have never had the power or the influence the corporate bosses have.
Furthermore, what there is left of organized labor is not ashamed of the candidates they endorse.
It is time for progressives to stop acting half-assed and chicken shit.
I was once a steelworker; our union office holders were elected. Likewise, the decision to strike or end strikes was voted on by all members.
I know that legislators like to list unions right along with corporations–it makes things easier. They also like to refer to some imaginary entity: “union bosses.” The first time a big boss at the mine asked me about my “new boss,” I looked around and said, “I don’t see any new boss; I just see the same bunch of ugly ignorant ass-holes.” I guess bosses don’t have much humor, as they got really pissed at me—oh well, he had it coming. (He must have been talking about the Steelworker election).
The problem here is that we are letting the corporate flunkies in government and media control the language.–Wrong.