FCC Urged To Collect, Share Info On Political Ad Buys

Ad from Crossroads GPS.

Eight Democratic senators are urging the Federal Communications Commission to approve a rule that would make real-time information about the purchase of broadcast political ads available to the public.

Super PACs and secretive nonprofit groups are expected to saturate the airwaves, especially in swing states, as the 2012 election approaches. The proposed FCC rule would make it easy for the public to learn which groups are buying political ads, how many they bought, and for how much.

With so many other moves to increase transparency in political spending stymied by gridlock in Congress and at the Federal Election Commission, the FCC rule is seen as one of the few reform measures that could take effect before the 2012 election is over.

The proposed rule would require broadcast stations to make their "political files" available on the FCC's website. These files, which include considerable information on campaign ads, are currently stored locally in paper form.

"With the 2012 election season already underway, citizens have a right to know who is purchasing public airtime to support or oppose candidates," said a letter sent to the FCC on Tuesday and signed by Democratic Sens. Jeff Merkley (Ore.), Daniel Akaka (Hawaii), Al Franken (Minn.), Sheldon Whitehouse (R.I.), Michael Bennet (Colo.), Mark Begich (Alaska), Jon Tester (Mont.) and Tom Udall (N.M.).

"The online posting of information in broadcast stations' political file cannot wait until months after the election; citizens deserve to know who is responsible for funding these advertisements today," the letter said.

Broadcasters are balking at the proposed requirement, arguing that compliance would be expensive.

One thing the rule wouldn't require is better identification of which big donors are actually behind secretive groups with generic names. And it wouldn't mandate additional information in the ads themselves.

Also on HuffPost:

 

 

Comments

[tin soldier]

09:45 AM on 02/24/2012

This is not an issue of the public knowing who buys air time, this is about the Democrat party knowing who is buying adverse air time .so they can compile a hit list.

[Littlewords]

06:02 PM on 02/23/2012

What say yee teaheads and righties?

Turn on the lights to see from where the funding cockroaches are emanating and heading.

Let me guess, you are going to find some imaginary self concocted great flaw with such accountability. If not, then pressure your representatives to support the policy. It is good hygiene for a sure to be abused process thanks to the errant Citizens United ruling.

[TexianLife]

05:14 PM on 02/23/2012

Good luck to them. It would be a good idea to know the names of the donors as I would like to know who or what country might be buying an election.

[Bombastic1892]

05:38 PM on 02/23/2012

The Maxist and Kenya are the answers you are looking for. Lol.

[Brown Trout]

04:19 PM on 02/23/2012

Just another democrat witch hunt so they can go after the donators. Looks like the libs have run out of people to blame

[Bushwhacked]

05:26 PM on 02/23/2012

A witch hunt!? LOL. That's rich, in the era of "birthers" and attacks on the First Lady. I think all Americans have the right to know who is funding politician's campaigns. With so much wealth concentrated in the hand of the richest few, their money undermines our democratic process. The "donators" as you call them wouldn't pour so much into a candidate's campaign unless they get something in return. We all deserve transparency.

[Bombastic1892]

05:38 PM on 02/23/2012

THAT THING THAT'S ALWAYS WITH THE PRESIDENT IS HIS WIFE???!!!

[tin soldier]

09:50 AM on 02/24/2012

Tell me about the rich donors .Do you think Obama really went to Florida to talk about gas prices?? Obama went to Florida for a $30,000 a plate campaign fund raiser. Now who do you think spends $30,000 a plate for dinner, the rich and big business,by the way the $30,000 per plate is tax deductable, you know 1 of those tax credits the rich get ,that Obama is against and you call republicans hypocrites

[gomezrules]

03:37 PM on 02/23/2012

"One thing the rule wouldn't require is better identification of which big donors are actually behind secretive groups with generic names."

That alone reveals how phoney this 'initiative' is from these Dems. I'd view them with more credibility if they ever held their own party head (Obama) to the standards of 'transparency' he promised as a candidate.

[SaveTheMarshMouse]

02:26 PM on 02/23/2012

Here's a novel idea..how about the stations rejecting the political ads that are not clearly marked as who is running them and just not selling the airtime to the PACS.....

[hicksticks2001]

04:00 PM on 02/23/2012

Why would stations do that? These aren't public service announcements. Stations are getting millions of dollars to put these ads up, why would they care?

[SaveTheMarshMouse]

07:18 PM on 02/23/2012

Not alway money - they certainly refused to air one superPac ad because it might "confuse" the voters...maybe, just maybe they have an ulterior motive for making sure only "certain" viewpoints are aired...right?

http://newsfeed.time.com/2011/08/13/des-moines-tv-station-refuses-to-air-colberts-super-pac-ad/