On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 2:03 PM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]> wrote: > > No the one where the candidate had to personally endorse the ads.
You mean CEO's would have to appear in ads they fund. But the unions are all exempt from even disclosing they funded it. > Silly me it wasn't a Republican bill so its automatically a threat to > free speech. http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2010/06/house-passes-campaign-disclosure-rules/1 The legislation was crafted in response to a January ruling by the Supreme Court that cleared the way for unlimited spending by corporations and unions on campaign ads that oppose or support candidates. > On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 1:15 PM, Sam <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> The bill that tries to override the Supreme courts decision on free speech? >> >> Weren't unions exempt from that bill? Why is that? >> >> >> On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 12:46 PM, Larry C. Lyons <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Just a simple comment Sam, the disclosure law that was before the >>> senate recently was filibustered by the Republican party. What are >>> they trying to hide. >> >> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology-Michael-Dinowitz/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:328768 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
