Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
Sun Feb 16, 2014, 12:03 PM Feb 2014

NYT: The Line at the ‘Super PAC’ Trough

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/16/opinion/sunday/the-line-at-the-super-pac-trough.html?_r=0

If you need something out of Washington and want to give a satchel of cash to a political candidate, no need to give it directly to the candidate. Federal law limits those contributions to $2,600 anyway. The thing to do is to give the money to the candidate’s “super PAC,” where no limits apply, to pay for attack ads against the candidate’s opponent.

That’s the path chosen by John Childs, a private-equity investor, who gave $250,000 to Senator Mitch McConnell’s super PAC, Kentuckians for Strong Leadership. (Could it have anything to do with Mr. McConnell’s staunch opposition to a tax increase on hedge fund managers, favored by President Obama and Democrats?) Joseph Craft, a billionaire coal executive, gave $100,000, and Donald Trump gave $50,000 to the same group.

...

This election year will be the moment when individual candidate super PACs — a form of legalized bribery — become a truly toxic force in American politics. The giant ideological super PACs formed by political operatives like Karl Rove spent hundreds of millions in 2012, but didn’t produce the conservative revolution demanded by the big donors. So now the torrent of cash is heading toward smaller groups set up to promote a single candidate or, more often, to trash that candidate’s opponent.

Dozens of these groups have already been formed, and political professionals predict that virtually every Senate race this year, and many contested House races, will have one or more. They can accept unlimited contributions, and thanks to the Citizens United decision, such donations can come from unions and corporations, too. Strictly speaking, these groups can have no contact with the candidate, but that prohibition is a joke. Most of them use the same voter lists as the campaigns, make the same points in their ads, and often are run by cronies of the candidate.



And foreign-owned corporations, as we've seen just this past week.

http://www.standard.net/stories/2014/02/12/feds-mexican-tycoon-exploited-super-pacs-influence-us-elections

Apparently we're slow learners.

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/10/canadian-foreign-donation-super-pac-restore-our-future
2 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
NYT: The Line at the ‘Super PAC’ Trough (Original Post) Scuba Feb 2014 OP
K&R. Thank you. woo me with science Feb 2014 #1
kick woo me with science Feb 2014 #2
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»NYT: The Line at the ‘Su...