The U.S. Chamber in the News - October 17

GOP Super PACs Increase Spending to Defend House
Pro-Republican super PACs and allied interest groups plan to spend tens of millions of dollars in an 11th-hour advertising blitz aimed at safeguarding the GOP's majority in the House…Another major player, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, spent $8 million in more than a dozen House races in California, Illinois and New York in the last week of September backing Republicans… The Chamber of Commerce is spending money in "orphan districts," which are districts in states that are neither a presidential battleground nor have a Senate race.  [The Wall Street Journal]

Debate Prep: Your Guide to the Issues and Who's Invested in Them
TAXES: With Romney's insistence during the first debate that he does not plan on cutting taxes by $5 trillion, tax policy could take center stage. Romney will stick to the Republican stance on lower taxes, though he's said he'd eliminate some mostly unspecified deductions. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the top lobbying organization in 2012 and one that often takes the lead in advocating for tax cuts, has given Romney $31,000 in contributions, according to Center for Responsive Politics research -- but its message is amplified by the donations of hundreds of its member companies. Goldman Sachs, which, like the rest of Wall Street, is concerned about the capital gains tax rate and the carried interest loophole, has given Romney almost $900,000 while it has sent Obama just $140,000. In fact, the whole securities and investment industry has favored Romney heavily, giving $4.8 million to Obama and almost quadruple that, $16.1 million, to Romney.  [Open Secrets]

BIPAC, Chamber Go to Twitter for Debate
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is also looking to influence the online debate with a less expensive and less visible ad buy designed to urge its followers to put questions to both candidates about how they will work on behalf of the business community. The chamber’s digital strategist, Nick Schaper, explained that the business group wants to “use the community that we built to get involved.” The chamber is soliciting questions for the candidates under the hashtag #Ask4Business, and then using the Promoted Tweet ad unit and keyword-based ads to get more attention for those questions. “They will be seen in Boston and Chicago,” Schaper said.  [National Journal]

The US Chamber of Commerce Spins a Web of Misinformation about Blitz USA
Contrary to what the company wants the general public to believe, Blitz USA went out of business because it refused to spend approximately $1 for a “flame arrestor” to make its gas cans safe. As a result, innocent people were seriously injured or killed. Now, the US Chamber of Commerce is trying to convince Americans that Blitz is the victim. The Chamber recently hired a documentary filmmaker to shoot footage of tearful workers losing their jobs when the lights went out at Blitz. The 30-second commercial aims to illustrate the consequences of abusive lawsuits, but what about the innocent victims who were burned, scarred, and maimed for life or lost a loved one? Why is there no mention of the innocent victims? [Legal Examiner]

Chamber report sees no need for more money fund reforms
Money market fund regulations adopted by U.S. securities regulators in 2010 reduced risks in the $2.5 trillion industry, according to a report sponsored by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that questions the need for further reforms. The report is the latest effort by the Chamber of Commerce to fend off efforts by SEC Chairman Mary Schapiro and the Financial Stability Oversight Council, or FSOC, to impose another round of rules on the money market fund industry.  The chamber released the report just two days before the FSOC is slated to meet behind closed doors, where the topic of money market funds is expected to be discussed. (Reuters)

Disclosure Laws Needed to Ensure Transparency in Judicial Elections
Disclosure laws would enable voters to know who is buying judicial elections in their states. One critic of stricter disclosure laws, Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), claims that such measures are “an effort by the government itself to expose its critics to harassment and intimidation.” The U.S. Chamber of Commerce agrees with this assessment, calling the federal DISCLOSE Act an effort to “upend irretrievably core First Amendment protections of political speech in the months leading up to an election.” The Supreme Court has repeatedly rejected arguments that such concerns render disclosure rules unconstitutional. The Court has said that if a spender can demonstrate that disclosure would lead to intimidation, then applying the rules in that case may be unconstitutional. Thus far, opponents of disclosure have failed to produce any such evidence.  [American Progress]