Level playing field?

President Obama mentioned a recent Supreme Court decision that, he asserted, would allow corporate special interests to flood the election landscape with their money. Now, legislation has been proposed to counter that.

The proposed legislation, meant to address a recent Supreme Court decision that eased the rules on political television advertisements, would require groups that run campaign attack ads to disclose the names of the businesses, labor unions and other groups that fund the efforts.

However, that provision cuts both ways: the "left" is opposed, for its own special reasons, or, rather, reason: the money it gets.

advocacy groups on the left, such as the Sierra Club environmentalist group and the Alliance for Justice, a coalition of liberal organizations, are lobbying to weaken the central element of the proposed bill. They worry that it could hurt their ability to raise money.

Dilemma.


The liberal groups, along with conservative and business organizations, are concerned that wealthy individuals and entities wouldn't donate to their organizations if their names had to be disclosed. "It's a significant issue," said David Willett, a spokesman for the Sierra Club. He said that the environmental group was working to change the legislation. It was too soon, he added, to say whether or not the Sierra Club would oppose the bill. Abby Levine, deputy director of advocacy programs at the Alliance for Justice, said the group shared the Sierra Club's concerns.

Wealth should not be able to hide behind anonymity as it seeks to influence policy and elections.