This week, congressional Democrats have been touting a polling memo from Obama campaign pollster Joel Benenson that allegedly shows strong public support for the DISCLOSE Act, the current hysterical effort by the self-styled campaign finance “reformer” and their Capitol Hill allies to undo the Supreme Court’s ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.
Ironically, the memo claiming broad public support for DISCLOSE has until now been, well, undisclosed. But Shopfloor.org, a web site run and maintained by the National Association of Manufacturers, has managed to track down a copy of this secret memo.
The memo is, needless to say, a mind-boggling collection of misstatements and biased questions—and not very fresh ones, either. Anyone who relies on this memo to inform them as to what the American public believes today about the DISCLOSE Act is going to be badly led astray.
To begin, the memo asserts that “80% of voters oppose the ruling,” a curious result given that CCP’s own poll on Citizens United in March found that nearly 60 percent of likely voters were not even aware of the case. If anything, voters are even less aware of the case today—another poll earlier this month by the liberal People for the American Way that also asked extremely biased questions found that 73 percent of voters “have not heard anything” about the Citizens United decision.
Needless to say, a poll claiming 80 percent opposition to a Supreme Court decision that a large majority of voters are not aware of has a credibility issue.
It’s possible, of course, that Benenson provided an accurate, nonbiased description of the Court’s ruling (I’ll apologize now to anyone who was consuming any sort of beverage when they read that last, and now must wipe off their screen).
Benenson provides some insight into the description of Citizens United he provided, reporting that “When voters learn that the ruling would make it easier for foreigners to spend money in U.S. elections, only 13% support it, while 82% oppose it.”
The problem, of course, is that the ruling does not make it easier for foreigners—when exactly did the “reform” movement become so xenophobic, by the way?—to spend money in U.S. elections. As has been pointed out countless times before, 2 U.S.C. 441(e) remains on the books, and reads:
§ 441e. Contributions and donations by foreign nationals
(a) Prohibition. It shall be unlawful for-
(1) a foreign national, directly or indirectly, to make-
(A) a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election;
(B) a contribution or donation to a committee of a political party; or
(C) an expenditure, independent expenditure, or disbursement for an electioneering communication
Current FEC regulations are even more stringent. 11 CFR 110.20(i) reads:
(i) Participation by foreign nationals in decisions involving election-related activities.
A foreign national shall not direct, dictate, control, or directly or indirectly participate in the decision-making process of any person, such as a corporation, labor organization, political committee, or political organization with regard to such person’s Federal or non-Federal election-related activities, such as decisions concerning the making of contributions, donations, expenditures, or disbursements in connection with elections for any Federal, State, or local office or decisions concerning the administration of a political committee.
Given that Mr. Benenson is, like his client, falsely claiming that foreigners will be able to spend money to influence elections as a result of Citizens United, it’s highly unlikely that any description he might have provided to the poll’s respondents was even mildly accurate. This is a concerted effort by Democrats to demagogue a non-issue. A Monday memo on the DISCLOSE Act from its chief sponsor, DCCC Chair Chris Van Hollen trotted out the phony phantom of foreign spending, but Senate supporter Sen. Russ Feingold takes the absurd cake: “Do they want Kim Jong Il in their democracy too?” Feingold said, according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
The polling memo also tries to show that there is widespread support for elements of the DISCLOSE Act, amusingly enough by citing polling data from before the DISCLOSE Act was even introduced.
The poll claims that 77 percent of voters support “strengthening political spending disclosure laws to ensure Americans can see the details of how corporations or other organizations are spending money to influence elections.” This statement almost entirely meaningless.
The question does not indicate at all the level of current disclosure that is required, or what respondents knew about current disclosure requirements. Did they know that groups are already required to disclose all contributions given or solicited in order to support independent expenditures? Did they know that commercials run by groups already must include the name of the group running the ad? Did they know that groups must already file reports with the government?
Again, given the biased nature of earlier questions, it’s unlikely that such information was given to those who took the poll.
In summary, what the Benenson memo reveals is that it is possible to cobble together out of date polling information based on biased and misleading questions, ask voters who aren’t particularly aware of either the general scope of Citizens United or what campaign finance laws currently require, and then write a memo to try to dupe Congress into believing there is widespread support for the DISCLOSE Act.
Members of Congress looking to get some idea of where the public stands on this issue would be better off looking elsewhere than Benenson’s memo. One place to look might be a letter signed by groups opposing the DISCLOSE Act. A total of 305 organizations have signed on, including many local groups like the Albany Area Chamber of Commerce (Oregon), Arkansas Chamber of Commerce, Central Louisiana Chamber of Commerce, Crop Protection Association of North Carolina, Independent Electrical Contractors of New England, Kansas Food Dealers Association, and the Colorado Association of Business and Industry. These organizations represent millions of business owners, large and small, and have tens of millions of employees.
Alternately, dozens of left-leaning groups representing millions of Americans have signed onto a letter opposing the DISCLOSE Act as long as the special deal that was cut with the National Rifle Association remains. Signers include the Alliance for Justice, League of Conservation Voters, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, the Sierra Club, U.S. Public Interest Research Group, Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Center for Science in the Public Interest, and the Natural Resources Defense Council.
Congress is under no obligation to listen to these groups or any others, of course, and can choose to trust any source they wish. If it were me sitting in Congress, however, a memo relying out outdated polling results obtained with seriously biased questions would give me pause.
