DISCLOSE Act passes House; campaign finance measure now goes to Senate

Democrats "want to use the majority here in the House to silence their political opponents, pure and simple," House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said, asking: "Is there any other explanation for this bill?"

Democrats in turn accused Republicans of hypocrisy for opposing the bill, given that many in the GOP have in the past praised transparency and "sunlight" in the political process.

Obama made clear his view of the Citizens United decision during his State of the Union address in January, when he complained -- in the presence of several justices -- that "the Supreme Court reversed a century of law to open the floodgates for special interests." The White House said this week that while it "would have preferred no exemptions" for any groups, Obama supported the DISCLOSE Act and would sign it if it reaches his desk.

Normally, campaign finance reform bills that become law then go to the Federal Election Commission, which undertakes a lengthy process of writing new regulations. DISCLOSE is unusual, in that it would go into effect 30 days after the president signs it, raising the prospect that the law could apply at the height of this election year.

Some Democrats wonder privately whether the measure will ever get that far.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and Sen. Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) released a letter this week offering reassurance to wary House Democrats that the bill has a chance of becoming law.

But while Reid and Schumer committed "to working tirelessly for Senate consideration of the House-passed bill," they offered no firm promise that the measure would ever hit the floor of their chamber. The Senate version has 50 co-sponsors and it's not clear whether the 60 votes necessary to overcome a certain GOP filibuster could be mustered.

Even if the bill does get to Obama's desk, it could face legal hurdles.

"I think the chances that it would be challenged [in court] would be 100 percent," said Rick Hasen, a professor at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles and the author of the Election Law Blog, adding that the bill's opponents would likely seek a preliminary injunction to bar it from going into effect.

Hasen noted that Democrats' revisions of the measure to exempt the NRA and some other organizations could be constitutionally problematic because it "creates different classes of groups."