Secret Funding of Chamber’s Political Ads May Change (Update1) - BusinessWeek

Secret Funding of Chamber’s Political Ads May Change (Update1) - BusinessWeek
By Jonathan D. Salant and Mark Drajem

April 7 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. companies would lose their ability to secretly finance political advertising run by organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce under a bill being considered by Democratic lawmakers.

The proposed legislation is a response to a Supreme Court ruling that allows corporations to spend unlimited amounts of their own money on political ads that call for electing or defeating candidates. The Jan. 21 decision triggered concern that companies would funnel unprecedented sums of cash into the Chamber’s system of anonymously funded pro-business campaigns.

President Barack Obama criticized the court opinion in his Jan. 28 State of the Union address, saying it would “open the floodgates for special interests.” The bill, which may be introduced as early as next week, would require nonprofit groups, unions and trade associations including the Chamber to identify who pays for ads designed to sway opinion on candidates for federal office.

“The Chamber is going to end up with at least one very undesirable element: The public is going to know exactly which corporations are the major funders,” said Craig Holman, who handles campaign finance issues for Public Citizen, a Washington group that supports more regulation of political giving.

The nation’s biggest business lobbying group, the Chamber spent $47 million on so-called issue advertising last year, mostly on health-care policy, according to Kandar Media’s Campaign Media Analysis Group in Arlington, Virginia. The Chamber has said it plans to spend $50 million on candidate- focused ads alone this year.

$144 Million in Lobbying

An additional $144 million of Chamber spending went for lobbying last year, more than five times that of the second- largest spender, Exxon Mobil Corp. That spending isn’t affected by the court ruling or proposed legislation.

The Chamber had fought what it called the suppression of company participation in elections, and hailed the Supreme Court decision in the case, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The proposed legislation would gut what appeared to be a victory for the group. ...