The ordinance, which requires people or entities contracting with the city for more than $25,000 to disclose contributions to certain advocacy groups, took its first step through city process Monday, receiving 4-0 approval from the Board of Estimates.What is the point of this? To facilitate political discrimination?
The ordinance is a local response to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in the Citizens United case, which allows unlimited corporate contributions to political groups so long as they are independent of candidates and their committees. The ordinance aims to limit vendors doing business with the city from providing anonymous contributions to advocacy groups listed under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue code.
११ जून, २०१३
"Businesses and groups that contract with the city could soon be required to disclose contributions to certain kinds of political advocacy groups..."
"... if a new ordinance proposed by Mayor Paul Soglin is adopted."
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
४८ टिप्पण्या:
Do business with the city, lose your rights. Because 'The Constitution' means something different in Madison.
And not in a good way.
The ordinance aims to limit vendors doing business with the city from providing anonymous contributions to advocacy groups listed under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue code.
No, the ordinance aims to limit vendors doing business with the City to those supporting approved causes, groups and candidates.
Political discrimination, as you suggest.
This should not bother you.
Government would never misuse data.
Wow. Disdain for the Constitution springs up like poppies on Flanders fields. Kinda puts that conversation about Edward Snowden in a bigger light, no? The statist overseers keep crowding in.
Time to get the counter-counterrevolution in high gear.
Just looking at enforcement here, if the contributions are anonymous then how would anyone ever be found out, if they chose not to volunteer that they'd offered an anonymous contribution?
Is this supposed to be a feel-good measure, or just something to catch anonymous donors who disclose their anonymous contributions to one person too many?
Are they also going to ask just how many times you contributed to Obama's campaign via a Website with credit card verification turned off (or would that violate the Fifth Amendment)?
I'd be interested to know whether paul Soglin or his cohorts ever took SDS money in their near half a century alliance.
No attempt to be subtle. A proud day for democracy in Madison.
The penalty for nondisclosure seems to be a one-year ban from contracting with the city.
This reminds me of the way the shops and restaurants around town were pressured during the protests to put up pro-union signs in their windows. I guess businesses who wanted customers felt they should do it, quite aside from what they really believed. This was at a time when Meade and I were told, on line, that we were "citizen banned" from every restaurant and cafe in town, because the people of Madison have an overwhelming political preference and those who don't share it don't belongs here.
The free speech values here feel really corrupt.
I'm disgusted with Mayor Soglin -- whom Meade and I voted for.
There's a real blindness interwoven into the liberal values here. It's quite awful.
Libruls try so hard to control everything.
There's a real blindness interwoven into the liberal values here. It's quite awful.
If the City government is hopelessly mono-partisan, there's no real hope for oversight. Chicago is a good case study but on a grander scale of course. Soglin is originally from Chicago, I believe.
First Amendment violation?
The legal industry would be hurting more financially without all these new laws libruls dream up which creates work for attorneys.
Just looking at enforcement here, if the contributions are anonymous then how would anyone ever be found out, if they chose not to volunteer that they'd offered an anonymous contribution?
If nothing else, there is incentive to support the favored groups. "Hey look, we just gave to Moveon and the teachers' union."
Constitutional rights is now a contact sport.
I thought the Lefties just loved the Constitution.
I can smell the cronyism from here.
Who sent ya?
US born Republican money = bad.
Foreign Soros money and all the other big corporate money for democrats = good.
Yes, no city should ever contract with any of those crazy small-government freaks.
The 4-0 vote is interesting. No one in the room had a problem with the idea. Perhaps they will someday call Comrade Althouse before them to explain her counter revolutionary ideas.
Don't worry, trust the govts., big or small, for your own good.
And to limit your political expression to approved causes.
Other than that, nothing.
Soglin, you authoritarian bastard. You have become everything you purported to rebel against when you were young.
"
There's a real blindness interwoven into the liberal values here. It's quite awful.
Scratch a liberal, find a fascist.
There's a real blindness interwoven into the liberal values
Ha, ha. Those *are* liberal values. If they could see, they wouldn't be liberals.
It's ordinances like these that beg for the removal of qualified immunity for public officials acting under the color of law. If in this instance those officials who voted for it and presumably uphold it were to be personally liable for the damages, the plaintiffs legal costs and the defense costs this type of fascistic nonsense would be so prevalent.
Soglin might try to reassure you that no political favoritism will occur, but the people working in city government and making contract decisions are fellow travellers with garage mahal.
I don't think there's a more corruptible part of government, at any level, than goods and services contracting.
Read another way, this will be a huge fund raising tool for the Progressive candidates. As clear a case of "pay to play" as there is.
Soglin, you authoritarian bastard. You have become everything you purported to rebel against when you were young.
Paul Alinsky
"Are they also going to ask just how many times you contributed to Obama's campaign via a Website with credit card verification turned off (or would that violate the Fifth Amendment)?"
Ask? Why would they need to ask?
I've taken to differentiating liberals from socialist progressives. The latter seem to have a great deal of authoritarian and fascist tendencies (companies shall do the bidding of the government.) I believe this separation of terms is making it easier for my Dem friends when discussing the current big brother trends. I tell them to take their party back.
Yeah. No interest in whether or not the company does good work. No interest in whether or not the citizens of Madison get value for their money. Thought crime must be prevented.
I guess as long as you can keep enforcing and collecting annual $15K property taxes on older comfortable but hardly lavish center hall Midwest homes, you can afford to think of thought crime first and competence second at best.
What would Art Ross, bicycle pedestrian coordinator, have to say?
Ann: "The free speech values here feel really corrupt."
The left does not now, nor ever has had actual "free speech values".
What they have are leftist free speech values.
All others will be silenced.
Hence, "hate speech" laws on campus' which only apply to non-approved speech.
Remember: "no free speech for fascists"...
It's baffling in the same way that the original McCain-Feingold debate was baffling: they don't even feel the need to pretend that it's about anything but retaliation against their critics.
At this level of contribution, I think transparency is helpful. On another note that sounds the impact of know who funds what, Penn State faculty withdrew from their fracking study because it was not peer-reviewed as they claimed, and it was revealed that the funding resources came from the fracking industry under study. if the group had been transparent about this from the beginning, I suspect the study might have had an impact. And I think I want to know who is behind some of push for city development, or new tax breaks-- why hide it?
Oh bullshit, RV!!! We're talking about the people hired to do the work. You're talking about the people setting policy that creates the work. In your world its the 4 people who voted 4-0 who should have to show their contributors, not the people they hire.
We've written His Honor a letter about this.
http://will-law.org/home/Case-Updates/2013/06/04/WILL-Warns-Madison-Mayor-About-Proposed-Disclosure-Ordinance
The board is way misunderestimating
The board is way misunderestimating
I'm disgusted with Mayor Soglin -- whom Meade and I voted for.
Seems to be a recurrent theme.
Sorry Meade.
I think they should pass a law to stop people from renting out dogs.
That seems really weird and perverted.
There are so many dogs that need a good home. Why would you rent other peoples dogs?
It's sick I tell ya.
There ought to be a law.
"What is the point of this? To facilitate political discrimination?"
No. No. No. All wrong. The point is to chill unpopular political activity in the first instance. You can't be discriminated against if you bite your tongue.
I'm disgusted with Mayor Soglin -- whom Meade and I voted for.
Quelle surprise.
Ann Althouse said...
The free speech values here feel really corrupt.
Feel? Don't hold back, now.
Remember when 'liberalism' was all about diversity and understanding others belief systems and coexisting and tolerance and fairness and respect for the individual and and equal opportunity and shit?
Yeah, me neither. But they claim it is. They lie.
I was in charm school at U Dub when Soglin was a law student and ran for mayor the first time. He was all about "don't trust The Man!" Now he's The Man, and The Man sounds a lot like Lenin these days.
I'm disgusted with Mayor Soglin -- whom Meade and I voted for.
You need to figure out a way to stop doing that.
I'm disgusted with Mayor Soglin -- whom Meade and I voted for.
Of course, this being Madison, I believe Soglin was the more centrist choice.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा