Since the Supreme Court ruling on the Citizens United case allowed for limitless spending of money in elections, it has become paramount that the public at least know where the recent, huge influx of money is coming from. This information is vital for the public to make informed decisions on the veracity of political ads.
The Disclose Act would require companies or individuals to report donations of more than $10,000 for political purposes; individuals and companies would be accountable for the ads their money buy. If the ad is publicly broadcast, the money source should be as well. It's a basic principle of honesty: If you criticize someone in public, stand by your belief instead of hiding behind a secret political ad.
Sadly, Sen. Orrin Hatch disagrees. He thinks that limitless amounts of money should be able to be spent in secret; he does not even want the Disclose Act to be voted on. Recently, he and fellow republicans filibustered allowing the Disclose Act to move to the Senate floor for an open and fair vote. Honesty and transparency should be cornerstones in politics, but apparently they are not.
Salt Lake City
- Can you pass the U.S. citizenship test?
- W. Bradford Wilcox: The new progressive...
- In our opinion: Don't 'Army-ize' local police...
- John Hoffmire: To feed the world, we must...
- Letter: Singles solution
- Charles Krauthammer: The jihadi logic
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Are...
- Letter: Protect public lands
- My view: Utah, where do you stand on... 96
- W. Bradford Wilcox: The new progressive... 43
- Letter: Bush dilemma 2.0 42
- In our opinion: Don't 'Army-ize' local... 28
- George F. Will: Obama needs Congress to... 27
- Can you pass the U.S. citizenship test? 27
- In our opinion: How committed are... 26
- Frank Pignanelli & LaVarr Webb: Are... 21