[Congressional Record Volume 156, Number 95 (Wednesday, June 23, 2010)]
[House]
[Pages H4681-H4682]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              DISCLOSE ACT

  (Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland asked and was given permission to address 
the House for 1 minute.)
  Ms. EDWARDS of Maryland. Mr. Speaker, I rise with regret today to 
express my concern about proposed changes to the DISCLOSE Act that I 
cosponsored. One particular change is deeply troubling--both on the 
politics and the policy. Having worked on campaign finance and ethics 
reform for many years, I didn't come to this conclusion lightly or 
uninformed. I was among the first to say that the Supreme Court 
decision in Citizens United was both wrong and shouldn't have given 
corporations a blank check in our elections.
  As an early cosponsor of DISCLOSE, I am dismayed that, in order to 
gain passage, we have fallen prey to bullying and threats from one of 
the most powerful special interest lobbying organizations in the 
country. Carving out an exception on behalf of one big group like this 
is just not the way to do reform. Shame on us.
  I proposed an amendment that would treat all of these organizations 
the

[[Page H4682]]

same and guard against unfair, undisclosed contributions. Corporations 
would be required to disclose if they had receive more than 15 percent 
from any corporation or from donors who had contributed more than 
$100,000 regardless of the number of members or whether they are on the 
right or the left. We shouldn't draw these arbitrary lines. We should 
be looking at the corrupting influence.
  The question is ``Who owns our elections?'' Yet, before we answer 
that, we need to know who owns us--the NRA or the American people. You 
decide.

                          ____________________