Sec. 2. Findings
266 words·~1 min read·
/bill/116/s/232/is/section-2A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
Congress finds the following: Public confidence in the Federal Government is based on the expectation that officers and employees will discharge their duties impartially, and avoid either actual conflicts of interest or the appearance thereof. The risk of an actual conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof, arises when a nominee or appointee to a Senate-confirmed position or an individual in a position of a confidential or policymaking character has previously donated to, solicited for, or received funds from a political action committee or entity organized under section 501(c)(4) or section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986.
Since the 2010 decision by the Supreme Court of the United States in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, spending by corporations subject to Federal laws and regulations has increased dramatically. While some corporate political spending is done publicly, contributions to entities organized under section 501(c)(4) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 need not be disclosed, making this spending effectively anonymous. The risk of an actual conflict of interest, or the appearance thereof, arises whether political spending is public or anonymous.
Current financial disclosure requirements do not require filers to report funds they have donated to, solicited for, or received from political action committees or entities organized under section 501(c)(4) or section 501(c)(6) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. Apparent or actual conflicts of interest are best ameliorated through public disclosure of this activity to the Office of Government Ethics so the apparent or actual conflicts can be addressed in ethics agreements negotiated between the filer and the agency in which the filer will serve.