With the mid-term elections around the corner, the September issue of Congressional Digest will focus on the latest controversy surrounding federal campaign expenditures.

Legislation titled the DISCLOSE Act (DISCLOSE stands for Democracy Is Strengthened by Casting Light on Spending in Elections) passed the House but has stalled in the Senate after opponents blocked a vote in that chamber. The bill was introduced to mitigate the impact of the recent Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission.  That ruling struck down a law that prevented corporations and nonprofit organizations from airing commercials that refer to a specific candidate for Federal office. The Court also determined that such groups can use unlimited funds from their own treasuries to advocate for the election or defeat of such candidates.

In introducing the DISCLOSE Act, which requires more explicit disclaimers in campaign advertising, Senator Charles Schumer (NY-D) said, “No longer will groups be able to live and [be] spending in the shadows.” Taking the opposing view, the Chamber of Commerce said of the bill, “Stifling of free speech is an abuse of the legislative process and is unconstitutional. It will not stand.”

The Senate may still vote on the DISCLOSE Act this fall, but if it fails to pass, candidates will face a changed campaign finance landscape with uncertain consequences in the 2010 elections.