Ask Governor Perry to Veto SB 346

Call Governor Perry's office at (512) 463-2000 to ask for a veto of Senate Bill 346.

In case you are only now tuning in, Senate Bill 346 subjects private non-profit organizations engaging in issue advocacy etc., to new reporting requirements.  Although the IRS is in hot water for illegally releasing the names of donors to such groups, SB 346 would make such disclosures legal and requisite.  To make matters worse, SB 346 specifically exempts unions from the new rules and restrictions.  The bill is so problematic that national voices such as Red State's Erick Erickson and even the Wall Street Journal have piped in to urge a Perry veto. 

In reaction to the strong push to veto SB 346, Representative Charlie Geren has added a revised version of the SB 346 language to the Ethics Commission Sunset bill, SB219.  While Geren's new language removes the explicit union exemption, he indicates that the real goal all along was to hamper conservative input into any future speaker's race.  Furthermore, as political law attorney Jerad Najvar notes on Lex Politico, the SB 219 language seems to include some rather unreasonable compliance requirements.

SB 219 now also includes a requirement that any “electioneering communications” by a nonprofit “disclose in the communication the source of the funds used to pay for the communication.”  See amendment 19 (Johnson).  This is unconstitutionally vague, and is also cumbersome without some serious narrowing and explanation by the Ethics Commission.  Is a nonprofit supposed to list the names of all its contributors “in the communication”? That’s not feasible and it would destroy the ability to send an advertisement at all in certain media.

(Read the full Lex Politico analysis here.)  

Governor Perry must decide by tomorrow whether to veto or sign SB 346.  If he does so, the SB 219 language could be revised or removed.  Call (512) 463-2000.

Update:  Here's a list of those who registered against SB 346 in the House State Affairs Committee.  It includes names from Texas Right to Life, Women's Wellness Coalition of Texas, and Texas Values.  These are the folks who will be hampered by this bill.  

WSJ, Conservatives Urge Veto of Ill-Conceived Disclosure Bill: Updated: Vetoed!

Update:  On Saturday, May 25, Governor Perry vetoed SB 346.  His statement is here.

While I have focused on the outrageous union exemption in SB 346, it seems other more-learned folks are suggesting the proposed Texas “disclosure” has even more troubling implications.
 
In yesterday’s Wall Street Journal, editors noted that SB 346 reporting requirements for social welfare and non-profit groups are very similar to several federal proposals that have been vehemently opposed by Republicans in Congress.  WSJ further indicates that SB 346 might be more about incumbent protection than transparency, and goes so far as to label Representative Charlie Geren’s comments as straight from “the Lee Kuan Yew school of free political speech.”  Ouch.  WSJ is urging Governor Perry to veto SB346.

Eric Erickson at Red State is also supporting a Perry veto.  Yesterday he summoned up the force to cry out, “Help me, Obi Wan Perry.”  Erickson expresses shock that some Texas Republicans would jump on a misguided effort to ‘get’ Michael Quinn Sullivan at the same time that the country is reeling over the recent IRS scandals.  With the party in power working to intimidate and stifle voices of opposition at the national level, it is hard to imagine Texans codifying such techniques.
 
Neither article mentions the union exemption, but it is hardly necessary at this point.  It’s no secret that threatened incumbent ‘Republicans’ like Ken Seliger and Charlie Geren are so determined to silence Michael Quinn Sullivan that they are willing to strike a Faustian bargain with Democrats by exempting unions from the bill.
 
Governor Perry should veto this bill; he has until Saturday to do so.

Update:  It seems that Representative Charlie Geren successfully added the SB 346 language as amendments to SB 219, the "Ethics" reform bill.  Even the Texas Public Policy Foundation is calling for Governor Perry to veto both bills.

From TPPF:

• America has a long tradition of anonymous political speech with the Federalist Papers being among the most prominent.
• Without anonymity of donors, and anonymity of members, Americans banding together for a cause are susceptible to harassment, intimidation, or worse.
• What is billed as transparency in SB 346 and SB 219 is instead an effort to silence Texans who dare speak up to their elected officials.
• The U.S. Supreme Court has frequently observed – most notably in NAACP v. Alabama – that forcing organizations to identify their donors and members violates their constitutional rights.
• We are seeing the effects of similar IRS policy coming out of Washington D.C., so we cannot allow the Texas government to tread the same path.
• Once the precedent is established that a 501(c)(4) and 501(c)(6) must disclose its members and supporters, it will only be a matter of time before other groups who displease the government are compelled to do the same. 

Misinformation About Union Political Disclosures

Yesterday I posted about Texas' Senate Bill 346, which would require greater political disclosure but would exempt labor unions from the new law.  Apparently some Republicans are defending the exemption because they have been led to believe that unions already engage in disclosure.

Political ethics attorney Jerad Najvar has done some fact-checking on these claims and shows that under IRS rules, even if a labor union engages in political advertising the union does NOT have to divulge contributor information.  Furthermore, unions can and do accept third-party contributions which do not have to be disclosed. 

Read the full story at Lex Politico. 

I'm afraid some of our legislators have been seriously mislead and I am pleading with them to do their homework before voting on Senate Bill 346.  As written, this bill is unacceptable. 

Who Represents Me?

Proposed Texas Law to Exempt Unions? Updated

Contrary to popular belief, labor union power is on the rise in Texas.  Few realize that our "right to work" status merely prohibits compulsory union membership.  Not only do we have a wide variety of private and public sector unions in Texas, union membership increased by 65,000 members last year.  It is no secret that the Democrat strategy to 'turn Texas Blue' is heavily reliant on burgeoning union power. 

Now it seems that the Texas Legislature is poised to pass legislation that would exempt labor unions from political disclosure rules.  Recently the Senate passed Senate Bill 346, which expands the definition of a 'political committee' and requires more activists to report contributions used for political purposes.  The vagueness of the proposed law is leaving many lawyers scratching their heads about who will be covered.  But one thing is certain, the law exempts labor unions.

From SB 346:

This subchapter does not apply to a labor organization or any subordinate entity or associated account of a labor organization.

Translated from the original Greek, this means:

This subchapter does not apply to a labor organization or any subordinate entity or associated account of a labor organization. 

As campaign attorney Jerad Najvar points out in Lex Politico, this law would "favor labor unions over everybody else."

Interestingly enough, it seems that the bill may have been slipped through the Senate without being read, because the Senate has taken the unusual step of recalling the bill.  (Concurrent resolution 33, April 17, 2013).  The recall measure passed by 21-10, but came too late to stop the House from taking up the bill.  SB 346 is currently listed as being in the House State Affairs Committee, and the House GOP still has an opportunity to amend.

In no way should any Republican be passing any law that exempts labor unions.  While there are other serious concerns about unintended consequences, political transparency is a good thing.  What is not good is giving labor unions special status.

Call your representative today and ask them to oppose SB 346 as written.
Who Represents Me? 

UPDATE:  My original wording left some readers confused about the current status of the bill.  I have revised to make it clear that the bill is technically in the House State Affairs Committee.

Related Posts
No Labor Unions in Texas?  Think Again...