McNally hits back at ‘blatant untruths’ about campaign finance overhaul

Senate Speaker Randy McNally (R-Oak Ridge) is hitting back at what he calls “blatant untruths” being spread about a the campaign finance and ethics overhaul advancing in the General Assembly.

McNally said efforts to get nonprofit “dark money” groups to disclose how much they are spending has caused the most pushback, including over what he called the false narrative that lawmakers are trying to force them to identify their donors.

“It is amazing that various seemingly ‘legitimate‘ groups are resorting to such disingenuous tactics to oppose it,” he said. “Is it because they are spending so much that Tennesseans would be appalled if they knew? Or is it that they spend so little that they fear they would be exposed as political grifters working to enrich only themselves?”

Here’s McNally’s full statement:

There are many blatant untruths circulating regarding the ethics reform bill Speaker Sexton and I have introduced.

The bill in question does not censor or otherwise curtail conservative activism or free speech in any way. Anything conservative groups can do now, they can still do under this bill. The legislation does not restrict their activity at all. The only additional requirement is disclosure.

Openness and transparency in the political process are prerequisites for freedom. For too long liberals, big corporations and corrupt political actors have been allowed to exploit loopholes in our system and operate in darkness.

The original Senate version as well as the current house version does not affect donors at all, just expenditures. It is simply a lie to say otherwise.

This bill is aimed at bad actors like the fictitious Matthew Phoenix and the various shell companies and shadowy PACs used by certain legislators to line their own pockets.

It is amazing that various seemingly “legitimate” groups are resorting to such disingenuous tactics to oppose it.

Is it because they are spending so much that Tennesseans would be appalled if they knew? Or is it that they spend so little that they fear they would be exposed as political grifters working to enrich only themselves?

If you are working to influence the outcome of an election, the voters deserve to know who you are and what you are doing. What could possibly be wrong with that? The fact this is even in question demonstrates the need for the legislation.