So the DISCLOSE Act is making headlines these days – and so is the NRA. Here’s what Hans von Spakovsky had to say on the Heritage Foundation blog:
Just as opposition was building in the House to the unconstitutional and burdensome DISCLOSE Act, which is intended to help Democrats in the November election by stifling the political speech of corporations and many non-profit advocacy organizations (but not unions), the National Rifle Association has apparently sold out.
Politico and others are reporting that the NRA has reached a deal to withdraw its opposition to the bill in exchange for an exemption for the NRA from its disclosure provisions. The exemption would apply to “organizations which have qualified as having tax exempt status under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code for each of the 10 years prior to making a campaign-related disbursement, that had 1 million or more dues-paying members in the prior calendar year, that had members in each of the 50 states, that received no more than 15 percent of their total funding from corporations or labor organizations, and that do not use any corporate or union money to pay for their campaign-related expenditures.”
There aren’t too many organizations that will fit within this exemption, but I understand the NRA thinks it is one of those that will. This exemption will not apply to small, less powerful 501(c)(4) organizations, which will be hit the hardest by the onerous, burdensome, and expensive disclosure requirements of the DISCLOSE Act, but it will apply to the large, well-funded and well-connected NRA.
After reading the act, it just reaffirms the position of the Tenth Amendment Center as an organization. a) We are For Profit – meaning, we’re not a 501c3 c4 527 or anything. We refuse to partner with the Federal Government – accepting its bribe of lower taxes – and accepting the risk that what we do will be restricted by their rules.
and…b) Our activism efforts are focused at a state level – so you won’t be seeing TAC ads on federal candidates. Why? Because no matter who wins in 2010 or 2012 or 20-whatever, I can promise you this – government will continue to grow.
So, while this act is obviously another constitutional violation, it won’t affect groups like TAC – while there aren’t many – because we’ve taken the position that the federal government is already a lost cause.
Latest posts by Michael Boldin (see all)
- General Warrants: Unconstitutional Then and Now - November 17, 2017
- Another Example of Political Grandstanding: The Resolution Against Military Action in Yemen - November 14, 2017
- Strategy from James Madison: Four Steps to Stop Federal Programs - November 13, 2017