Palazzo blasts Obama campaign disclosure proposal

U.S. Rep. Steven Palazzo in a written statement is criticizing the Obama Administration's effort to require more disclosure for campaign donors who bid on federal contracts. Palazzo's statement:

Yet again, the ever-extending arm of government is attempting to reach further into the lives of Americans under the Obama Administration. This most recent attempt is through a draft executive order from the President to silence political critics by placing over-reaching disclosure regulations on campaign donors, specifically those made by individuals or companies who bid for federal contract work. Although this order has yet to be implemented, it shows the thinking of this Administration and its intentions.

One cannot help but wonder why this closed-door, opaque administration suddenly has a desire to be transparent in the name of “ensuring the integrity of the federal contracting system.” If the president had real intentions of being transparent, why has there been no such order governing public labor unions? Shouldn’t grant recipients such as Planned Parenthood be required to adhere to these same requirements? Where was this transparency during the drafting and passing of Obamacare?

Attempting to censor those who may disagree with your views is a classic example of Chicago style intimidation tactics that deter participation to those who do not play President Obama’s game. What his administration claims “increases transparency and accountability” is an attempt to use executive power to punish or silence political adversaries.

The president’s draft executive order is an attempt to skirt the Supreme Court’s ruling that stated under the First Amendment certain campaign funding by corporations is protected. In addition, both chambers of Congress have voted against further disclosure regulations of campaign donors. The president’s attempt to overstep two branches of government is a slap in the face to the institution of representative government.

Governmental contracts should be issued based on the contractor’s bid, application, and ability. This entity should remain wholly separate from that of political donations. Combining the two is simply “big government” over-reach and a move to control personal political involvement. “Democracy is compromised when individuals and small businesses fear reprisal, or expect favor from the federal government as a result of their political associations,” said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, after reports of the draft emerged. This censorship by the Obama Administration, in reality, does not create transparency—it does the opposite. Such abuse of executive power would call for discrimination against companies based on past campaign contributions of executives and officers.

In the 2010 midterm elections, Americans made it clear that they wanted less government interaction in their lives. They understood then that under the Obama Administration, big government brought about a $900 billion failed stimulus plan at a time of economic uncertainty, big government created a healthcare plan that undermines the basic foundation of our government, and big government has no concern for record unemployment that threatens the economic stability of our country. The last thing Americans want now is more government regulation. I have voted repeatedly for amendments prohibiting the use of funds to implement this draconian policy proposal if it were issued. Unchecked, this administration demonstrates once again that their out-of-touch agenda ultimately restricts our freedoms, harms our economy, and weakens our country.