Posted on 09/28/2010 11:37:02 PM PDT by bruinbirdman
When Barack Obama was elected president on the back of an army of small donors in 2008, the commonly held wisdom in Washington was that a new model had emerged in how elections would be funded in the future.
Mr Obama’s supporters, giving donations of $25 each over the internet, coupled with substantial support from traditional big Democratic givers, gave him a distinct advantage over rival John McCain. Republicans, unmotivated and lacking the Obama campaign’s organisation, lost the money war.
But 34 days before the congressional elections, the table has turned on Democrats. An influx of cash from a relatively small band of companies and wealthy individuals is having a dramatic impact on races across the country, and heavily favouring Republican candidates who began the election cycle at a financial disadvantage to their Democratic rivals.
Campaign finance experts say Republican donors are not only more motivated in this election, they have also been more adept at taking advantage of changes in campaign finance rules that have eradicated restrictions on big moneyed interests – including labour unions and trade associations.
The Supreme Court’s January ruling, known as Citizens United, and lower court rulings influenced by the decision have given corporations and other outside groups new power to sponsor advertisements that directly support or attack candidates. They have eliminated rules that used to prohibit the groups from running direct ad campaigns in the last 60 days before an election.
Meanwhile, a deadlock within the Federal Election Commission, the US regulatory agency, has made it clear that certain kinds of independent organisations could spend money on elections without disclosing their donor base. The changes have given rise to what are known as “super-pacs”, largely unregulated groups that, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics, are poised to raise unlimited sums in federal elections.
The most prominent to emerge so far is known as American Crossroads, a group that is being advised by the former top strategist for President George W. Bush, Karl Rove. American Crossroads and its sister organisation, Crossroads GPS, have said they will spend $52m this election cycle. The group is running ads in support of the Tea Party candidate in Nevada, Sharron Angle, who is challenging Harry Reid, the Democratic majority leader, and has promised to inject $1m into the California election to fight Senator Barbara Boxer.
Trevor Potter, a Republican campaign finance lawyer who worked for the McCain campaign, says Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy wrongly assumed in the Citizens United decision that the relaxation of election rules would not pose a problem, because groups would have to disclose their activity – and that Congress could pass legislation forcing them to do so. But Senate Democrats last week failed to pass legislation that would have forced groups to disclose their donors after Republicans blocked the move through a procedural tactic.
Evan Tracey, president of the Campaign Media Analysis Group, which tracks political advertising spending, says other factors are also feeding into the money frenzy. In this election, no congressional seat is considered safe – and there are many open seats creating multiple elections in states.
Mr Tracey predicts that the impact of the spending increases will only truly be felt in coming weeks when, no longer facing timing restrictions, groups will pour money into high-impact negative ads that aim to have a “disruptive” effect. “The closer you are to the election the more disruptive you are going to be,” he says.
According to a study released by Wesleyan University, advertising spending in the election has far exceeded levels from previous polls. As of September 15, roughly $220m was spend on political ads for congressional races, compared with $135m spent on those races in 2008.
The money is only there because of the power, and the federal government has usurped far to much of it.
Read this 400 word essay to get the whole story :
http://www.coachisright.com/%e2%80%9coutside%e2%80%9d-conservative-contributions-drowning-are-democrats-and-fueling-our-poll-surges/
Oh yes, the cash. Regs say you can’t accept cash for deposit to a PAC account and must give it to a charity because it can’t be identified. This issue is like so many others - those that are going to play by the rules always did and those that aren’t are going to spend all their time thinking about ways to get around all the regs.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.