Why is Rick Perry Afraid of Transparency?

[Seawytch]

What's he hiding? What is he afraid of? Why would he veto this GOP backed bill that would require disclosure of contributions over $1000?

Rick Perry Vetoes GOP-Backed Disclosure Bill

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) vetoed a Republican bill Saturday that would have required nonprofits that engage in politics to disclose their donors.

The measure, SB 346, would have required 501(c)4 social welfare groups that spend more than $25,000 in a calendar year on political expenditures to disclose contributions above $1,000.[...]

One of the Texas bill's sponsors, state Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo), criticized Perry's veto. "This is a sad day for integrity and transparency in Texas," he said in a statement. "Governor Perry's veto of SB 346 legalizes money laundering in Texas elections. The Governor's veto is ironic since money laundering is illegal in other endeavors. As other states have stepped forward to ban election money laundering by dark money 501c4 non-profit corporations, it is embarrassing that the Lone Star state is now an official safe haven for political money launderers. Again, the 2010 Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United vs FEC case clearly stated that disclosure of contributions was critical to the right of corporations to participate in our system of democracy."​

 

[Katzndogz]

This is why

He then alluded to the current controversy over the IRS' targeting of tea party groups. "At a time when our federal government is assaulting the rights of Americans by using the tools of government to squelch dissent, it is unconscionable to expose more Texans to the risk of such harassment, regardless of political, organizational or party affiliation," he said.

Perry is right.

If we had an honest government, he would have a weaker argument but we don't have an honest government. We have a government that thinks nothing of persecuting its political opponents so Perry is doing the right thing.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

What's he hiding? What is he afraid of? Why would he veto this GOP backed bill that would require disclosure of contributions over $1000?

Rick Perry Vetoes GOP-Backed Disclosure Bill

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) vetoed a Republican bill Saturday that would have required nonprofits that engage in politics to disclose their donors.

The measure, SB 346, would have required 501(c)4 social welfare groups that spend more than $25,000 in a calendar year on political expenditures to disclose contributions above $1,000.[...]

One of the Texas bill's sponsors, state Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo), criticized Perry's veto. "This is a sad day for integrity and transparency in Texas," he said in a statement. "Governor Perry's veto of SB 346 legalizes money laundering in Texas elections. The Governor's veto is ironic since money laundering is illegal in other endeavors. As other states have stepped forward to ban election money laundering by dark money 501c4 non-profit corporations, it is embarrassing that the Lone Star state is now an official safe haven for political money launderers. Again, the 2010 Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United vs FEC case clearly stated that disclosure of contributions was critical to the right of corporations to participate in our system of democracy."​

Why should you care? You dont live here.
And with all of calis problems maybe you should direct your attentions to your home state.

 

[Lovebears65]

Why is Obama since he ran on it .. Closed door meetings on Obama care . Executive order on Fast and Furious just to name a few

What's he hiding? What is he afraid of? Why would he veto this GOP backed bill that would require disclosure of contributions over $1000?

Rick Perry Vetoes GOP-Backed Disclosure Bill

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) vetoed a Republican bill Saturday that would have required nonprofits that engage in politics to disclose their donors.

The measure, SB 346, would have required 501(c)4 social welfare groups that spend more than $25,000 in a calendar year on political expenditures to disclose contributions above $1,000.[...]

One of the Texas bill's sponsors, state Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo), criticized Perry's veto. "This is a sad day for integrity and transparency in Texas," he said in a statement. "Governor Perry's veto of SB 346 legalizes money laundering in Texas elections. The Governor's veto is ironic since money laundering is illegal in other endeavors. As other states have stepped forward to ban election money laundering by dark money 501c4 non-profit corporations, it is embarrassing that the Lone Star state is now an official safe haven for political money launderers. Again, the 2010 Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United vs FEC case clearly stated that disclosure of contributions was critical to the right of corporations to participate in our system of democracy."​

 

[blackhawk]

This thread from a supporter of the man who told us he would have this most transparent administration in history yet has been anything but transparent to funny.

 

[Claudette]

Speaking of transparancey??

What the hell ever happened to that most transparant administration in history bs that Barry was slinging??

Oh wait. I forgot. He's full of shit. Never mind..

 

[Katzndogz]

This thread from a supporter of the man who told us he would have this most transparent administration in history yet has been anything but transparent to funny.

It is from someone who believes that people should be persecuted for their political opinions.

 

[tjvh]

What's he hiding? What is he afraid of? Why would he veto this GOP backed bill that would require disclosure of contributions over $1000?

Rick Perry Vetoes GOP-Backed Disclosure Bill

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) vetoed a Republican bill Saturday that would have required nonprofits that engage in politics to disclose their donors.

The measure, SB 346, would have required 501(c)4 social welfare groups that spend more than $25,000 in a calendar year on political expenditures to disclose contributions above $1,000.[...]

One of the Texas bill's sponsors, state Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo), criticized Perry's veto. "This is a sad day for integrity and transparency in Texas," he said in a statement. "Governor Perry's veto of SB 346 legalizes money laundering in Texas elections. The Governor's veto is ironic since money laundering is illegal in other endeavors. As other states have stepped forward to ban election money laundering by dark money 501c4 non-profit corporations, it is embarrassing that the Lone Star state is now an official safe haven for political money launderers. Again, the 2010 Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United vs FEC case clearly stated that disclosure of contributions was critical to the right of corporations to participate in our system of democracy."​

Perhaps Rick Perry is only following the example set forth by the Obama administration with regards to transparency.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Rick Perry was Chairman of Al Gore's first campaign in 1988. He was a registered Democrat at the time.

 

[Skull Pilot]

What's he hiding? What is he afraid of? Why would he veto this GOP backed bill that would require disclosure of contributions over $1000?

Rick Perry Vetoes GOP-Backed Disclosure Bill

Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) vetoed a Republican bill Saturday that would have required nonprofits that engage in politics to disclose their donors.

The measure, SB 346, would have required 501(c)4 social welfare groups that spend more than $25,000 in a calendar year on political expenditures to disclose contributions above $1,000.[...]

One of the Texas bill's sponsors, state Sen. Kel Seliger (R-Amarillo), criticized Perry's veto. "This is a sad day for integrity and transparency in Texas," he said in a statement. "Governor Perry's veto of SB 346 legalizes money laundering in Texas elections. The Governor's veto is ironic since money laundering is illegal in other endeavors. As other states have stepped forward to ban election money laundering by dark money 501c4 non-profit corporations, it is embarrassing that the Lone Star state is now an official safe haven for political money launderers. Again, the 2010 Supreme Court decision in the Citizens United vs FEC case clearly stated that disclosure of contributions was critical to the right of corporations to participate in our system of democracy."​

He's afraid of transparency for the same reason Obama is.

 

[Seawytch]

Oh please. Who do you think will support the same law being introduced by a bipartisan Committee in Congress, Democrats or Republicans? Guesses as to which party will oppose it?

Pass such a law and I guarantee the President wouldn't veto it as Perry did.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Oh please. Who do you think will support the same law being introduced by a bipartisan Committee in Congress, Democrats or Republicans? Guesses as to which party will oppose it?

Pass such a law and I guarantee the President wouldn't veto it as Perry did.

Politicians don't want the sheep to know where they get their money.

It's not a Repugnantcan or a Dimwitcrap thing.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Rick Perry doesn't need any transparency. It would come out that he possibly frequents Homosexual clubs. "Google" that, I dare ya'.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Rick Perry doesn't need any transparency. It would come out that he possibly frequents Homosexual clubs. "Google" that, I dare ya'.

There is not a scum sucking motherfucking power hungry politician on this planet that wants transparency.

 

[peach174]

I think that many of you would change your mind, if your name and who you donated to was made available for all to see and you got lots of hate mail and was targeted by many groups.

It's about protection of the individual who donates to any of the parties.

 

[kwc57]

This is why

He then alluded to the current controversy over the IRS' targeting of tea party groups. "At a time when our federal government is assaulting the rights of Americans by using the tools of government to squelch dissent, it is unconscionable to expose more Texans to the risk of such harassment, regardless of political, organizational or party affiliation," he said.

Perry is right.

If we had an honest government, he would have a weaker argument but we don't have an honest government. We have a government that thinks nothing of persecuting its political opponents so Perry is doing the right thing.

Thread killa!

 

[OKTexas]

Rick Perry doesn't need any transparency. It would come out that he possibly frequents Homosexual clubs. "Google" that, I dare ya'.

What, have you seen him there? You might want the check out your dear leaders activities.

Hillary Well Aware of Obama?s Gay Activities | Fellowship of the Minds

BTW I think Perry did the right thing.

 

[hjmick]

Why is Rick Perry Afraid of Transparency?

I see you've avoided the question thus far, but what the hell...

Why is Obama afraid of transparency?

 

[Seawytch]

Why is Rick Perry Afraid of Transparency?

I see you've avoided the question thus far, but what the hell...

Why is Obama afraid of transparency?

I don't disagree that the President is not as transparent as I'd like, but he is not the subject nor are the things he is not transparent on the same as this. Instead of deflecting, start your own thread on the President's lack of transparency. Here is an article you can use for your thread.

http://mobile.slate.com/articles/ne...y_the_white_house_is_as_opaque_secretive.html

Now, would you like to comment on THIS issue?

 

[Seawytch]

This is why

He then alluded to the current controversy over the IRS' targeting of tea party groups. "At a time when our federal government is assaulting the rights of Americans by using the tools of government to squelch dissent, it is unconscionable to expose more Texans to the risk of such harassment, regardless of political, organizational or party affiliation," he said.

Perry is right.

If we had an honest government, he would have a weaker argument but we don't have an honest government. We have a government that thinks nothing of persecuting its political opponents so Perry is doing the right thing.

No, he isn't. He's allowing money laundering in the way of 501Cs. This would require donations over $1000 be reported which has nothing to do with the IRS "scandal".