Disclosure & Transparency

"This shows there appears to be a gap in the law – a presidential candidate like Donald Trump could be blasting out these campaign commercial-like videos to millions of views, but viewers would not have real-time information about who is paying for them," Steven Spaulding of government watchdog group Common Cause told ABC News.  "So, we might start seeing a new trend of political campaigns blasting out videos to millions of viewers and voters will not have information to know who is paying for it to better evaluate the message," Spaulding added.

Today, Common Cause released a new report on more than two dozen ballot initiatives and state constitutional amendments to strengthen, and in some cases undercut, democracy that will be decided by voters at the state and local level in November. “Democracy on the Ballot” traces the growing momentum behind citizen-driven pro-democracy reforms in recent years and examines initiatives and amendments on ballots in the 2018 general election from Florida to California and from North Dakota to New Mexico and urges support or opposition to each.

“Zooming out to 30,000 feet, I doubt the new broader donor disclosure standard will have any impact on big independent spenders,” said Paul S. Ryan, vice president of policy and litigation at Common Cause, a group that advocates for greater disclosure in campaign finance. “There’s an easy end run around these new broader disclosure requirements, and big spenders will undoubtedly take advantage in order to lawfully evade donor disclosure.”

An annual assessment by the Center for Political Accountability shows many S&P 500 companies are spending less on direct donations to political races and election-related causes than in recent years. Additionally, those S&P 500 companies that are still making political donations are moving toward more transparency. Changing political winds and growing publicity risks have created a climate in which major corporations are finding it’s safer to cut direct political ties. Paul S. Ryan, vice president of policy and litigation at Common Cause points out that with valuable interests and influence to protect, corporations are still impacting political outcomes in other ways.

New revelations in The Wall Street Journal continue to reveal evidence that supports allegations we made in January and March Department of Justice and Federal Election Commission complaints of violations of campaign finance laws and criminal code provisions related to hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. The Wall Street Journal reports today that in February of this year President Trump personally directed his lawyer, Michael Cohen, to initiate an arbitration proceeding and seek a restraining order against Stormy Daniels pursuant to a nondisclosure agreement negotiated with Daniels in October 2016. President Trump’s familiarity with the arbitration clause in the contract is strong evidence that Trump was familiar with the details of the October 2016 contract, notwithstanding his constantly-changing story and claims that he didn’t know about contract with Daniels before the 2016 election.

Today Congresswoman Anna Eshoo introduced the TRUE Fees Act. The bill requires that below-the-line fees from communications providers be included in the advertised price. Below-the-line fees are hidden fees companies add on to their users’ monthly bill but do not disclose in their advertised prices. The bill also prohibits forced arbitration agreements for wrongful billing and requires transparency in equipment fee increases.