Executive Order for Contract Disclosure

Democrat Rep. Anna Eshoo: both parties "...should oppose any Amendment designed to keep the public less informed..."

On July 7, 2011, viewable in the CSPAN Video Library, Republican Rep. Tom Cole rose to speak in favor of his Amendment No. 4, which would circumvent an April presidential order that would require companies bidding on federal contracts to disclose federal campaign contributions. Cole stated, "Companies wouldn't be judged merely by the merits of their past performance, by their capability to do the job, but would also be obviously considered on the basis of who they gave money to or against."  Cole said that disclosure would hamper a company's right to donate to political parties and campaign candidates that they choose.  


Democrat Rep. Norman Dicks rose in opposition to the Republican Amendment, "Our system has been improved by having public disclosure of political contributions.  The more the public knows about where the money is coming from, the better off the citizenry is."  He described the Amendment as an attempt to prevent disclosure of government contracts and especially contributions given to third party entities. The Republicans say the disclosure could be used nefariously.  Dick notes, "[Republicans] argue that companies should not disclose more information because people in power could misuse that information to retaliate against them.  Using the oppositions logic all campaign disclosures would be bad."  He countered that there are current laws which require disclosure and the Republican logic would need apply there too. His side, the Democrats, worry companies could make contributions secretly and notes it's what they're trying to avoid.  "... we already know, the Boeings the Lockeeds, the General Dynamics... they all make contributions and they are all disclosed. What's wrong with disclosure?" Dicks urges a "No" vote on Coles Amendment.  Republican Cole rises again and states, "The intent here is to make sure that we never link political contributions with the awarding of government contracts." 



Democrat Rep. Anna Eshoo rises and states that Cole's Amendment is an attempt to block disclosure, which is about "disinfectant" and "sunshine" to what's going on with contractors who do business with the Federal Government.  Eshoo reminds Republicans that the contracts are paid for with tax-payer dollars and asks that there be transparency and accountability for where their cash goes.  Anna says both parties "should oppose any amendment designed to keep the public less informed... We know who supports this amendment, the American League of Lobbyists."  Republicans had previously opposed contribution limits, stating they need disclosure instead.  Now that bills to promote disclosure are on the table, Republicans write Amendments to oppose them.  

Republican Rep. Tom Cole:

"The intent here is to make

sure that we never link political 

contributions with the

awarding of government contracts."

A verbal and recorded vote were taken. Republicans voted in favor of the Amendment to block disclosure.  Democrats voted against it in favor of disclosure.  With House Republicans outnumbering Democrats by 48 seats, Cole's Amendment to block the executive order for disclosure, that Democrats clearly oppose, passes in the House.