In need of disclosure

Monday, Oct. 25, 2010 | 2:01 a.m.

If there is any reason to rewrite the campaign finance rules, it’s this: Hundreds of millions of dollars are being raised and spent this election cycle to promote special-interest agendas, yet the source of much of that money doesn’t have to be disclosed to the public.

The purpose of disclosure laws is to give the public the ability to see who is influencing the candidates, but that’s not happening under the current system.

The New York Times provided an incredible example of the problem Friday by looking at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which has served as the focal point of the business lobby. The chamber has spent $75 million this election cycle promoting its agenda, including a series of TV ads that have appeared across the country, but it doesn’t have to disclose who’s funding the effort. As the Times reported, the chamber is a nonprofit organization, and thus it doesn’t have to disclose donors in its tax filings. And as long as the donations aren’t earmarked for specific ads aimed at candidates, it doesn’t have to make campaign finance disclosures.

Nearly half of the $149 million in donations the chamber received in 2008 came from just 45 donors, and the Times reported that many of the big donations coincided with lobbying or political campaigns that could have affected the donors’ industries.

The Times was able to ferret out several of the chamber’s large donors by piecing together an array of public documents. Here’s an example of what it found:

• Prudential Financial gave $2 million as the chamber mounted a massive effort to weaken the Wall Street reform bill.

• Dow Chemical gave $17 million as the chamber fought proposals to tighten security rules on chemical facilities.

• Goldman Sachs, Chevron Texaco and international insurance company Aegon gave more than $8 million over the past several years to the chamber’s foundation, which has criticized government spending and regulation.

It is stunning that the chamber doesn’t have to disclose its donors, given the organization’s political influence. With its affiliates, the chamber put $144 million toward lobbying last year, making it the largest lobbyist in the nation.

But thanks to two U.S. Supreme Court rulings over the past few years, there has been a turn away from disclosure. The result is that groups are springing up to take large — and often anonymous — corporate donations and using them to influence elections.

The public should know who’s putting large amounts of money into these campaigns, but Republican leaders in Congress have blocked legislation that would create more openness, and that’s probably because the GOP is reaping the benefits of the current situation. For example, American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS, affiliated groups with heavy ties to the Republican Party, have spent an astounding $65 million in this election and have targeted Nevada’s Senate race as well.

The lack of strong disclosure laws for groups such as these is wrong. Voters should know who’s behind the ad campaigns. Congress should make disclosure the rule.