E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS
A 2010 Supreme Court decision was supposed to herald a new era of special interests' influence in elections, giving rise to shadowy outside spending groups -- "super PACs" -- that could take advantage of unlimited corporate campaign spending.
President Barack Obama and other Democrats openly fretted that the court's 2010 "Citizens United" ruling, which struck down limits on corporate political spending, would allow big business to marshal their resources to bend the law to suit their own purposes.
But with just less than two weeks until the election, super PACs have hardly been the overt bogeyman many political observers had feared. They're plenty influential -- but they’ve become part of the DNA of American politics by operating like para-campaigns for Obama and Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney.
The Washington Post's Jennifer Rubin, American Bridge's Rodell Mollineau and The Huffington Post's Jon Ward join Luke Russert to talk about the state of the race with less than two weeks to election day.
Super PACs' influence over campaigns hasn’t been quite as Obama and other Democrats first warned.
“Corporate lobbyists will be able to tell members of Congress if they don’t vote the right way, they will face an onslaught of negative ads in their next campaign,” Obama said in 2010 comments pushing for Congress to adopt the DISCLOSE Act, which would have required more disclosure for donations to these organizations.
Recommended: Obama and Romney begin campaign blitz
Rather, super PACs -- and the seasoned political professionals who run such groups -- have stepped forward to assume and bolster some of the traditional functions that might otherwise fall to candidates themselves. Super PACs have hardly been able to dictate the terms of the election, but their absence might have otherwise meant dire straits for candidates who benefited from their spending, primarily on television ads.
“The outside group can serve the purpose of providing cover to the challenger while the incumbent attempts to define the challenger with dramatically lopsided resources,” said Jonathan Collegio, the communications director for American Crossroads, one of the largest and most influential Republican super PACs.
NBC News
American Bridge 21st Century, a Democratic Super PAC devoted solely to opposition research. Opposition researchers find the dirt on presidential candidates that turns into the mud that is slung throughout the campaign season.
Rock Center
In the presidential campaign and a slew of House and Senate races across the country, super PACs have served varying purposes. They have helped prop up candidates whose own bank accounts are lacking, or have done the dirty work against an opponent that a candidate’s campaign might not be able to execute.
“Between Crossroads and the Chamber and all of those groups, they’ve done a lot in a lot of our states,” said one Democrat familiar with the party’s Senate campaign efforts. “They’ve probably kept their Republican candidates afloat in a couple of instances.”
Super PACs and the battle for the White House
In a similar manner, Romney was the beneficiary of super PAC support at crucial points in his campaign for president. During the Republican primary, a super PAC founded by former aides -- Restore Our Future -- was able to overwhelm Romney’s opposition with millions’ worth of television ads pillorying Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum.
And after Romney emerged from that primary, bloodied from the process and with relatively depleted bank accounts, Restore Our Future and Crossroads were able to offer him support on the airwaves -- stepping forth as a kind of surrogate for the GOP nominee in the absence of a more robust campaign effort.
Recommended: Detailing Romney's foreign-policy shifts; the latest in a long chapter of change
In essence, no action or advertisement made by Romney or Obama has gone unanswered. That means no super PAC has been able to dominate the general election, though the countervailing advertising has contributed to a kind of Cold War in politics; each side keeps accelerating its spending, partly for fear of falling behind the other side.
That sentiment motivated Obama’s own flip-flop toward super PACs earlier this year, when his campaign dropped its objections toward the groups and embraced Priorities USA, a supportive super PAC founded by former Obama aides.
“With so much at stake, we can't allow for two sets of rules in this election whereby the Republican nominee is the beneficiary of unlimited spending and Democrats unilaterally disarm,” Obama campaign manager Jim Messina wrote in his Feb. 6 missive to Democrats explaining the reversal.
The Daily Rundown's Chuck takes a deep dive into Colorado. What does it take to win the state, and why is it such a critical piece of the President's path to 270.
To that end, the pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA has spent $52.7 million on the general election, according to NBC News ad-tracking sources, $35.7 million of which has been spent following the Democratic National Convention. Restore Our Future, by contrast, has spent $73 million on the general election, $34.8 of which came after the Republican convention, when Romney got access to the pool of general election funds he had built, but had been unable to access.
A series of other super PACs have stepped forward to spend millions more on both candidates’ behalf.
Super PACs and downballot races
It might be that super PACs’ effect are more pronounced in races downballot, where finances and organization can be more uneven between House and Senate candidates.
House Majority PAC, a Democratic super PAC dedicated to electing members of the House, was able to coordinate with other progressive groups and pool resources and research in a targeted way.
“One of the ways we’ve been effective is helping to coordinate efforts from a whole host of progressive groups that have traditionally been involved in electoral politics,” said Andy Stone, the group’s communications director. “House Majority PAC has worked to efficiently and effectively use the resources that we have to make a difference in House races, and make sure what happened in 2010 doesn’t happen again -- where House Democrats were just overwhelmed by the last minute by outside money.”
But there are also limits to what super PACs can accomplish.
Paul Lindsay, the communications director for the National Republican Congressional Committee, said the NRCC appreciates its outside supporters but has tried to lead the way with its own spending.
“We’ve always worked under the premise that we can only control what is in our organization and capacity,” he said.
“Candidates matter,” said the Senate Democratic operative, echoing that sentiment. “Super PACs can only do so much.”
Related: Ohio tops all states in ad spending
That principle extends to the presidential election, as well. Collegio of American Crossroads argued that it’s up to candidates -- not their supportive super PACs -- to close the deal with voters.
“Ultimately, outside groups that can’t coordinate are far more effective at making the case against candidates than at making the case for candidates,” he said. “A candidate must push himself or herself over the finish line with their own message and identity.”
Leave a Comment:
So we aren't all as stupid as they thought...and they never anticipated the power of the DVR...
Super PACs haven't become the bogeyman many feared
Not yet!
Sen McCain stated that unlimited cash spending can only create scandal. He's right! It's only a matter of time....
I wonder if Ohio has the same sentiment?
I literally "tuned" out by turning off my TV for 95% of the time the past 3 or 4 months. People should try it.
Then "big business" will think twice about trying to buy an election.
Super PACS should be illegal; period.
There are far to many gullible voters who fail to educate themselves on the issues and candidates and the power of the Super PACS is to influence those people with their deep pocket spending. In other words, they will try to buy the votes to get what they want regardless of how it effects the average citizen.
nomoresameo -- I agree 100%. They should be illegal.
Citizens' United is responsible for Romney/GOP's ability to flood the airways with endlessly LYING ads. NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE in the presidential race.
Along with GOP LIE and reverse-finger pointing, their strategies include:
1. Suppressing the vote at the polls.
2. CEO's Bullying employees to vote against their own interests.
MeMeMeMeMe Romney is on tape encouraging employers to vote their interests (himself). Who said he was out for the 100%. He ain't.
nomoresameo - totally agree. The Supreme Court let the country down on this one. Hopefully it will be reversed in the future.
Also, no candidate or their family should be able to own any interest in the voting machines used to tally votes.
Obama/Biden 2012
Republican banked on Super PACS to drive in fear but we're not seeing that. What a wasted venture. No one is buying
Mitt can't even lie his way throughthis election.Down with Barackracy!*
*Barackracy. Noun. (1) A combination of Barack Obama and bureaucracy. To be used when discussing his political agenda. (2) The bureaucratic policies, emphasizing layers of non-elected government officials (Czars) , as put forth by the administration of President Barack Obama. (3) A regime of governing that does everything backwards to the detriment of the citizenry.
VOTE ROMNEY/RYAN 2012
Get private money out of politics. That means PACs, Super PACs, direct campaign contributions AND self-funding by the candidates themselves... Limited public funds only!
Elections should be fought on the basis of platform and ideas, not money. Elected officials should only be accountable to VOTERS, not just those of us with the deepest pockets!
???
Backhouse
Citizens' United is responsible for Romney/GOP's ability to flood the airways with enldessly LYING ads.
Backhouse, so is ALEC (American Legislative Exchange Counci) since they write the laws are and aligned with the Koch brothers.
ALEC Exposed: Rigging Elections
http://www.thenation.com/article/161969/rigging-elections
ALEC Exposed: The Koch Connection
http://www.thenation.com/article/161973/koch-connection
PS. I just got a message which has brought me nearly to tears. A friend of my brother's eye vessels has ruptured and he has no insurance. This is what the right wingers and MYTH will give US on a higher scale if health care is repealed.
4 more 4 44
Obama/Biden 2012
Here is the debate last night hosted by Larry King that Obama and Romney declined. Oh, well...they know they would have been put to the test and destroyed.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5EcaX12h46k
Agreed, which is why I believe they are the "Bogeyman" people feared. All candidates should get equal time and equal money.
Jody-1593626
Jodyism= Reaching as far up into the bowels of your brain to pull out what you declare is relevant.
Super-pacs eliminate any candidate that isn't in the pocket of the big businesses that fund them; God NBC you suck sometimes.
Of course they don't matter much when we're down to these two democracy usurping parties backed by the same multimillion dollar corporations.
I'm pretty sure Jody-1593626 is a romney2012 spam-bot or someone just copying hypothetical or bogus information from an Ampad notebook that romney2012 gave to her.
Give it time. They are keeping it cool until it is forgotten, then they will work to freeze out candidates that do not have their agenda. Remember, this allows foreign countries to influence our elections also.... Term limits are a must.
Jody-Lotsa-Numbers,
Don't you get tired of posting the same thing over and over? Do you really have so little to say?
This article is absurd, we now have just a handful of multi-millionaires, billionaires and multi-billionaires trying to buy their candidates way into public office. How could that possible be good for our democracy? Whomever penned this opinion piece is silly!
That's right. There is absolutely no voter fraud other than voter supression by those evil Repbulicans.
You might want to take a look at this.
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/10/24/congressman-jim-morans-son-caught-on-tape-teaching-vote-fraud-techniques/
oops!
Someone was asking about the PAC adds, I listen to Radio instead of TV. The adds are still a pain, but I don't have to look at them.
Here is a bigger issue
Cuyahoga County is having problems with the 75,000 new voter registrations. Seems a large number of them are using addresses to abandoned home and vacant lots. Makes you wonder what might be going on.
How about the over 1200 illegal votes cast by felons in Minnesota in 2008? There is no way to subtract votes once an illegal vote is cast. Think about it. An illegal vote makes someone else's vote worth less.
They haven't taken away my vote, but they have made my contributing to a campaign meaningless. How can my 10$ or even 100$ compete with the hundreds of millions that PACS are throwing around?
Oh yeah Super PAC's are a real problem, as if there is anything left in Washington that hasn't already been sold. Politicians have been fleecing taxpayers for personal gain for decades. The politicians will have to start taking the country back to resell it again for Super PAC's to become the problem Obama claimed in his State of Union address.
Donald Trump's long awaited surprise announcement...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MgOq9pBkY0I&feature=youtu.be&hd=1
The Trumpster didn't read this...
http://www.factcheck.org/2012/07/obamas-sealed-records/
Don't buy into the cheap enthusiasm crap Team Willard is selling, it's counterfeit!
Just last night at First Read they posted not one but TWO threads highlighting the
hypothetical "confidence" & "momentum"!
This is a bluff which has Karl Rove's filthy hands all over it; he used it in 2000 and has
revived it in hopes no one would notice!
http://nymag.com/news/index.htm
A big concern that I've heard, that seems plausible to me is that the super PACs can influence down-ballot races a lot more powerfully than the presidential races. If a Democratic Congressman or state Senator hasn't bowed down to worship the NRA, Karl Rove's super PAC might bury him under an avalanche of attack ads with scary pictures of the poor shlub morphing into Osama Bin Laden and claiming that he's going to take everyone's guns away, and kill your granny to pay for Obamacare.
President Obama isn't as greatly affected by super PACs because he gets so much of the money for his campaign from small donors who never max out their contributions, and the presidential campaigns get discounts on TV ads that can be as much as 1/6 the cost of ads paid for by outside super PACs. So a million dollars from small donations to Obama can equal as much as six million super PAC dollars spent by crazy billionaires to purchase the White House for Mitt Romney.
'This article brought to you by the Committee for the Support of PACs'
You are very condescending to the average citizen. I think you might be surprised at how astute they are.
I wonder how soon MSNBC will run the video of the son of a prominent democrat giving talking points on how to cheat on voting? Probably not news worthy on MSNBC.
While I agree that uneducated voters are a big problem, I'm curious...what do you think about "get out the vote" drives where they load people on buses that don't care about the election (and haven't done any research), and ship them to polling stations? It seems to me, this is another attempt at manipulating the election.
I beg to differ.
Who put up all the billboards in low-income neighborhoods telling people they could be arrested if they owed money and tried to vote?
Who is making all the phone calls saying that if you owe a parking ticket you can be hauled in from the polls?
Who is putting out flyers saying that Democrats vote on Wednesday?
We'll never know. Because there's NO LAW that the funders be disclosed. It's all a black box.
One of the most asinine headlines to ever grace the nbcpolitics page.
Only time will tell the true end result of this horrible 'bench' legislation.
But there is NO doubt that the Corporatists have the upper hand. No doubt whatsoever.
OH good i feel better.
The influence SUPER PAC's have on Americas' politics is real, only a dumbasss would think politicians are not influenced by $$$$$$ and power......, but I'll tell you what's even worse, more corrupt and dangerous to all Americans', and that's purposefully deceitful reporting the twisted, tainted, bias delivering of mis-information that the LAME STREAM MEDIA does everyday on behalf of their political agendas or personal point of view. That is the most dangerous of all things political in every country of the world. It's no wonder every dictator in the world controls the information their local news agencies release with an Iron Fist. I love our first amendment, but it has become a double edge sword because of the abusive manner in which America's news agencies use it.
You MSNBC, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN, HLN and yes, even you FOX (which was born as a direct result of your corrupt counter-parts), all of you suck the bloody rag. None of you are worth a shyt, and every single one of you is incapable of delivering untainted news, this is particularly true when politics is involved. You are corrupt to the bone.
I hate every single last 1 of you to your filthy rotten core, I hate you for what your are (OPINIONATED REPORTERS), I hate how you make your money (OFF OTHER PEOPLES MIS-FORTUNES OR FORTUNES), and for
what you represent (CORRUPT, BIAS NEWS REPORTING) and what you are doing to the people of this country (MIS-INFORMING AND FEEDING YOUR BIASED UN-ASKED FOR & UN-CALLED FOR BS OPINIONS).
Its only been two years. The corporations have not yet had enough time to get their PACs in place and the full influence of the power of advertising to get into the hands of Lobbyists.
In 10 years, the corruption will be so evident that even the SCOTUS will be forced to admit they were wrong.
Speaking of those billboards, do you know who put them up?
Clear Channel Communication.
Who owns Clear Channel?
Bain Capital.
Clear Channel Communications, Inc. is an American mass media company, that is headquartered in San Antonio, Texas. Founded in 1972 by Lowry Mays and Red McCombs, the company was taken private by Bain Capital, LLC and Thomas H. Lee Partners in a leveraged buyout in 2008; as a result, the company now operates as a wholly owned subsidiary of CC Media Holdings, Inc.
dear article: WRONG!
1) I believe it is way too early to make this call. The elections aren't over yet.
2) I must ask myself would this election between these 2 candidates be as close if not for all that wasted money.
3) Would there be a better selection of candidates if it wasn't necessary to raise ridiculous amounts of money for a campaign?
4) Would these candidates actually be able to discuss real issues with real solutions on an intelligent level if it wasn't for all this money and marketing BS?
So, the consensus here still seems to be that SuperPacs should be illegal.
OK, are you all in agreement that the $4 billion that
unionsgoonions, including union-dues, have spent over the past 7 years, should also be illegal?Now, before you start with the stale rant that unions don't use the rank-and-files money you need to read the WSJ report from July 2012: (excerpt)
The usual measure of unions' clout encompasses chiefly what they spend supporting federal candidates through their political-action committees, which are funded with voluntary contributions, and lobbying Washington, which is a cost borne by the unions' own coffers. These kinds of spending, which unions report to the Federal Election Commission and to Congress, totaled $1.1 billion from 2005 through 2011, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.
The unions' reports to the Labor Department capture an additional $3.3 billion that unions spent over the same period on political activity.
The costs reported to the Labor Department range from polling fees, to money spent persuading union members to vote a certain way, to bratwursts to feed Wisconsin workers protesting at the state capitol last year. Much of this kind of spending comes not from members' contributions to a PAC but directly from unions' dues-funded coffers. There is no requirement that unions report all of this kind of spending to the Federal Election Commission, or FEC.
Unions spend millions of dollars yearly paying teams of political hands to contact members, educating them about election issues and trying to make sure they vote for union-endorsed candidates.
Corporations and their employees also tend to spread their donations fairly evenly between the two major parties, unlike unions, which overwhelmingly assist Democrats. In 2008, Democrats received 55% of the $2 billion contributed by corporate PACs and company employees, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Labor unions were responsible for $75 million in political donations, with 92% going to Democrats.
Such activities are central to unions' political power: The proportion of members who vote as the leadership prefers has ranged from 68% to 74% over the past decade at AFL-CIO-affiliated unions, according to statistics from the labor federation.
But political spending by the AFL-CIO headquarters and its affiliated unions climbed to $608 million in the 2009 and 2010 election season from $452 million in 2005 and 2006. They spent $316 million in 2011, a nonelection year, amid the fight with Mr. Walker in Wisconsin
That's a lotta Brats isn't it?
Should we use the guillotine on the unions or just a simple firing squad?
Here's the link for the complete story:
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304782404577488584031850026.html#project%3DLABOR20120710%26articleTabs%3Darticle
ROMNEY/RYAN 2012 FOR REAL AMERICANS©
The real bogeyman is the MONEY in general.
Why do you all think you have any right to tell other folks what they can and can't spend their money on? They earned it, they can do whatever they damn well please with it, within the limits of the law. I suspect that you object because someone is funding a candidate you oppose; too bad. Go earn your own money and use it to back your candidate....the law allows you to do that.
spider, because it is destroying our democracy. Money is not free speech; not everyone has access to it equally.
Whether through "super pacs" or not, money is profoundly influencing elections - probably even more in races other than the presidency. Worse, it is harming our ability to make policy. Politicians can't even talk about guns or climate change, for example, without getting money-bombed in the next election. So they don't address important issues, just because the corporations don't want them to.
RealAmericansFirst -- Speaking of those billboards, do you know who put them up?
who is speaking of billboards... besides you? You don't have to go on a blog to discuss things with yourself, you can email it...
So, Bain Capital, what does that make Bain?
And every one of you COULD HAVE helped prevent this if you had gotten involved in the Popular Amendment Movement (www.faircampaignreform.us) over two years ago and helped get the federal Election/Campaign Finance Reform and Term Limits constitutional amendments passed. It's not to late to get this done before the 2014/16 elections however. Download the petitions, sign them, circulate them, email them to family and friends, start a local and statewide grassroots movement to collect the signatures/petitions, then get them filed with your Secretary of State. Each state may have different rules on the number of signatures required to get the state to call for a Constitutional Convention to pass the amendments, but it IS a start. And you will have done something other than sitting here at your computers complaining about the corporate influence in our elections. You can also modify the ECFR amendment to get a state amendment passed with the same rules for state/local elections.
Petition for US Constitutional Amendment For Election Reform
We, the undersigned US citizens, duly registered voters in our respective states/territories, do hereby petition for our state to approve the following amendment to the United States Constitution by the method noted below.
Election Reform:
1. Abolish the Electoral College (Repeal Amendment 12)
2. ONE NATIONAL primary date to be held on the Tuesday eight (8) weeks prior to the General Election day for Congressional offices and for the President. Candidate petitions must be filed with the local/state elections boards 60 days prior to the Primary Election date. Federal election petitions shall be uniform in every state and shall include a “contract with the voters” that spells out clearly what that candidate stands for on all issues that they may have to address in elected office. They shall be held accountable in court for breach of that contract if elected and any/all terms are not met.
3. NO campaigning allowed for any elective federal office more than 60 days prior to the National Primary Date.
4. NO campaign contribution shall be donated to any candidate of more than $200 from an individual or $500 maximum from a family (spouses/children living in the same household.) No donations shall be made to a candidate more than sixty days prior to the primary date. No candidate shall contribute from their own funds more than 60% of the total donations from other private individuals.
5. NO campaign contribution from any PAC, corporation, union, non-profit organization, special interest group, etc. shall be allowed for any elected federal office.
6. NO third party campaigning (separate PAC ads, corporate ads, etc.) for/against any candidate shall be allowed at any time during or before the election season.
7. NO party conventions shall be held to select the presidential candidates. The selection must be done at the ballot box in the primary election.
8. The One Man/One Vote Supreme Court ruling shall be enforced by this Amendment, namely that NO federal candidate selection shall be by any means other than the ballot box on Primary/General Election Dates.
9. National Party Organizations shall NOT raise money for or donate to specific candidates of their party prior to the dates outlined above.
10. PAC’s shall NOT be granted tax-exempt status by the IRS, and any non-profit organization who uses their funding for political purposes shall lose their tax-exempt status.
11. All lobbyists shall be outlawed from influencing Congress at all times.
This amendment shall be approved ONLY by State Constitutional Conventions to be called within 90 days of this petition being submmitted to a state’s Secretary of State. A minimum of 25% of the registered voters in each state shall be required to further this petition to the respective Secretary of State.
Name Signature State Address
Petition for US Constitutional Amendment For Congressional Term Limits
We, the undersigned US citizens, duly registered voters in our respective states/territories, do hereby petition for our state to approve the following amendment to the United States Constitution by the method noted below.
Term Limits for Congress:
1. Representatives to Congress shall serve no more than two two-year terms in the House.
2. Senators shall be elected to no more than two six year terms in the Senate.
3. No elected official shall serve more than six terms in office in any combined elected offices (House/Senate/Presidency.)
This amendment shall be approved ONLY by State Constitutional Conventions to be called within 90 days of this petition being submmitted to a state’s Secretary of State. A minimum of 25% of the registered voters in each state shall be required to further this petition to the respective Secretary of State.
Name Signature State Address
There is a lot of talk going around at lunch and dinner tables as well as the bars and campaign offices this campaign season. The talk has been about today's media, specifically NBC/MSNBC. David Gregory's name comes up quite a bit, as does Chuck Todd's and Andrea Mitchell and of course Joe Scarborough and Politico and all the GOP's who come on as guests.
What everybody seems to be in agreement with is the fact that Washington DC is a republican run town. The money is with the GOP, particularly the media, so "journalists" are doing their utmost to hope for a Romney win, as it will benefit them.
Same with the ads. If a tv station full of "journalists" slant their stories to make the race close for more ad revenue, then let's face it.
They aren't journalists at all.
The biggest disappointment for us loyal MSNBC viewers has been MSNBC. Not counting Lawrence O'Donnell, Rev. Al, Martin Bashir and Chris Matthews and Ed Schultz. They fight very hard night and day to get to the truth.
There are a lot of GOP guests who lie on MSNBC right to our faces, Mark Halperin at the front of the list. And we don't understand why Keith is gone, yet these people remain year after year.
Like I said. We have supported MSNBC. Yet we aren't being told the truth.
Perhaps we all have different definitions of "Lean Forward".
We after all came to MSNBC because of Keith. He is the one who made MSNBC an exciting place to turn to.
It's a different place now. Not too welcoming to us Obama/Democratic supporters.
We're trying to keep our democracy going, not destroy it. That's the GOP's platform, not ours.
Money and GOP controlled media has ruined journalism.
Deleted, got posted twice
Wow, MSNBC's bias is really showing today! Breaking news that Obama means what he says?? Wow. Not what I would consider the breaking political news of the day!! Nothing like a close race, down to the wire, to bring out the political biases in the media!!
Romney/Ryan 2012 - A New Hope
WHAT? WHAT? Not a bogeyman? WHAT PART OF THE PLANET IGNORANCE ARE YOU KING OF?
They have DESTROYED everything that was good about our elections - public participation, trust, a sense of ownership - and replaced it with LIES AND HATE.
No. If you CAN'T PHYSICALLY VOTE FOR SOMEONE, YOU SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GIVE THEM A DIME. NO CORPORATE MONEY should be ANYWHERE NEAR our political system. Illegal campaign contributions should be a CAPITAL OFFENSE just like TREASON because they are indistinguishable!
Obama and McCain AGREED to use public funding during the 2008 campaign, which would have limited funds and let the best man win. Well, Obama knew he couldn't win on that, so he renegged on the agreement and let the union buy the election. Now the hypocrites are squealing about how "evil" the money influence is. BooHoo, Obama is one and done.
If super-Pacs are part of our political DNA then it's time for a bone marrow transplant. I'll say this about all the money that is floating around political campaigns. It should be considered taxable income. Union contributions too so don't think I'm being one-sided here. If they all have sooo much money to throw around like they are then there is absolutely no reason why it is not taxed! If any lobbyist, big industry ceos or any politician don't like it. They should be busted on the spot for tax evasion!
Where is the story about the mass mailouts to many counties in Florida, all to registered Republicans(except 1), suggesting they may be ineligible to vote in the upcoming election ? My understanding is the mailout occurred from the State of Washington which is traditionally a blue state !!
Where is the story from NBC ?
I regularly watch MS NBC and I think they are the best commercial news source on television. That said, this is MSNBC, owned by Comcast and General Electric. I'm not surprised to see this story downplaying SuperPacs because huge corporations favor huge corporations.
It's like a very obese man arguing that cheeseburgers aren't really so bad for you.
The truth is we don't know where a lot of SuperPAC and other outside money has gone and continues to go since this is the first election under Citizens United.
A few thoughts. There is no removing the influence of money from elections because its takes a ton of money to get elected. I have yet to ever hear anyone say their voting decision was based on the idiotic 30 second TV ads run by the political campaigns of either party. Many people hit the mute button as soon as one comes on. New Obama video "I mean what I say". Now, there is the humorous statement of the year. How about Benghazi, unemployment, economic growth, the national debt. The more accurate statement might be "I can spin what actually happens to make it sound plausible that its close to what I once said".
You can put lipstick on a pig, but it is still a pig! Super PACS are big slathering pigs at a trough, and they infringe on my right to a democratic election. I don't care which side uses them
As long as they are made to report who donates to those super PACs (influnce askers) and that the influence peddlars (SUPER PACS) divulge who is funding their efforts we will have a good Idea of what the motivation is. Unfortunately the money is secret sources and that is not good. Foreign money is not to be spent on US elections but since the Super PACs don't have to tell where the money comes from that would be an easy way for foreign influence to make its way into our politics. Personally I would rather see a limit placed on campaign spending and tha tthe source of every penny needs to be reported. Campaigning should be primarily by TV and last for 2 weeks with equal time for all candidates, not just the 2 major parties, with debates ending the process just a week before election day. There would be the last week for candidates to give their final pitch to Americans in a prime time speech of one hour each and that is it. What we have now seems never ending and most folks are worn out by the end of it. I would go broke if I sent them all the money they are asking for, both campaigns and PACs.
I doubt we'll get election reform until we get politicians who realize it isn't benefitting them. The problem is most Americans don't pay much attention until just before the election and they only believe the BS of one side or the other and don't research or ponder the consequences of voting one way or the other. So it will continue unabated ad infinitum.
@ Mockingbyrd,
Living in Ohio! I'm sick of these lies. I'm sick of seeing signs from Romney in a few people's yards. I'm sick of the way our government is working together. I'm extremely sick to my stomach that somewhere in Wisconsin 170+ people are losing their jobs and it's being moved to China. I'm sick to death every time I hear Romney is coming to Ohio for fear he may be telling some one I like firing people "Your Fired". I'm sick of listening to a man tell the world he know nothing about squat or where other countries are located (Iran has no access to the Oceans). I'm sick of Romney's my way or the highway!
Living in Ohio! We are at the lowest number of unemployment since 2008 and I read every day of more companies hiring.
What a bunch of tripe to say PAC's aren't big bad bogeymen. I say 'boloney' on that! Like my TV is not FLOODED with unethical Enquirer-type ads. Like my mailbox is not FLOODED with lying, screaming, fearmongering, obsessed slander called 'flyers' that use scare tactics and bullying to denegrate opponents. Who writes that sort of junk, anyway? Obviously, someone who is for sale, cheap. Every inititive, every referendum, every candidate, no matter which state, is being drowned in a tsunami of PAC dollars intending to shut down any dialog of decency, standards, courtesy, or merit. Discusting that now NBC tries to influence even the outrage of this assult by painting it as valid and natural. Next they'll be saying it's all in the imagination, and this type of 'civility', and perhaps America itself, is and has always been about PAC money. Sheesh...
The supreme court just created another layer of sticky money in Washington DC that further distances the average person from having a fair say on government decisions.
And seriously NBC...what a lame, BS headline... The money boys of influence are just getting warmed up in their nice new Super PACs.
Does anyone believe this propaganda bs by the new NBC? Pacs are making a mockery of political system. Don't fall for this obvious attempt to sugar coat fascism.
Excellent point.
it seems to me that a lot of people think that this SUPER-PAC money only goes into campaign ads. Where did you get that idea? There are many other ways to buy influence. There are also many others who want to say that MSM is "liberal" or blatantly "conservative". That is not exactly true, either. MSM is CORPORATE and globally owned. They only care about their money AND they are trying to influence your political leaning AND they can donate as much as they want to further their agenda. It should also be noted that any 3rd world kingpin can become Incorporated in the United States and then be able to give millions to help sway the vote. How is that constitutionally right?
Romney isn't limiting his options to super PACS. His back up plan is below.
Michael O'Brien, This article is a vapid word salad that offers nothing remotely close to a convincing argument, much less a factual analysis. A pathetic attempt a paper over the effects of the Citizen's United/ American's for Prosperity/ Koch Brothers funded suit and the SCOTUS decision to further facilitate the corrupting influence of corporate and plutocratic money on American politics. The 2012 Election has yet to happen, and yet you make the unfounded assertion that "Super PACs" haven't had a significant corrupting influence. Talk about trying to validate a preconceived notion with smoke and mirrors and present it as objective journalism...trashcan journalism at its worst.
@jimspence - romney/ryan for the real neo-fascist americans.
Superpacs/citizens united are just another plug pulled out of the life support machinery of the near-dead american democracy. After 30 years it's in a coma; another thirty like the last and it will be dead.
This article is a giant lie.
Yeah, they make NO difference. That's why donors keep paying millions into them, anonymously.
Such a lie.
I think "propaganda" is the most fitting description of this article.
I would be happy, if after destroying our nation's economy and thrusting us into two wars, JUST ONE PERSON from the previous Republican Bush Administration would step foward and say one simple word:
Sorry.
The GOP is the boogyman! We will all regret it if Romney is elected and here is why!!!
If you do not study history you are doomed to repeat it.
Fact: Right now Obama has the lowest level of violent crime in 40 years.
Fact: Crime follows poverty and not all people receiving benefits are able to work.
Fact: Romney has vowed to leave tens of millions with no medical, food or income. Romney will:
1) Repeal Obamacare, which would immediately kick about 17 million low-income earners and their family members off of Medicaid.
2) Create block grant Medicaid issued by state and cap its growth. Conservative governors and legislatures would limit enrollments and cut benefits substantially. Eventually it would lose 15-20 million people within a decade.
3) Reduce food stamps by more than $100 billion over the next decade. This would reduce enrollment by at least 8 million people.
4) Cut funding for Planned Parenthood and other reproductive health organizations. More babies born to poverty.
Fact: Reagan made cuts to welfare and food stamps. but they were far less than Romney who will put tens of millions on the streets in a few short years.
Reagan caused robbery, assault, theft, vehicle theft, larceny, drug related crime to go up. It did not slow down until Clinton.
Reagan holds the 60 year high for violent crime that followed cuts to the poor.
WARNING - Romney will far exceed that with his deep cuts!
FACT: Under Romney, the poor who have NOTHING will victimize those with money. The middle class schools, neighborhoods, the cities, anywhere money is, crime will flourish!
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Vote Obama / Biden 2012 to maintain the 40 year lowest crime rate.
Source: Article on Wikipedia entitled, "Crime in the United States"
Super PACs haven't become the bogeyman many feared
Not yet!
Sen McCain stated
What happens when foreign governments can buy into elections via shadow companies? Remember that most of the companies in China are at least partially government owned. With little or no oversight, this is going to happen and the stink is going to be huge...
That's already been happening for years...and I bet American companies (and the US government) do the same thing with elections in other countries...
The Mormon church wants Romney in. On The Million-Dollar Trail Of A Mystery SuperPAC Donor. npr.org/blogs/money/2012/04/26/151379832/on-the-million-dollar-trail-of-a-mystery-superpac-donor
GT....I hope that small elephant you are screwing has an STD and your typically small LIBERAL pecker suffers the same ROT that your brain obviously has. You are the most disgusting POS on the Planet. BTW....don't look now , but I understand your Sister is a Teabagger and is almost as big as a small elephant. Please tell us that isn't her, CREEP. Azzholes like you make it SO EASY to Vote for the NEXT POTUS, Mitt Romney. Your Supreme Liar is done...stick a fork in his azz.
"super PAC"S haven't become the bogeyman many feared"
Oh really, how do you explain the lying, flip-flopping, unstable, clown from the right getting this close to becoming President. The ONLY excuse is corporations buying a puppet.
"Super PAC's haven't become the bogeyman many feared"
I disagree whole-heartedly. In fact, i think they've gone beyond all that and extended into the arena we "forgot" to fear... The actual content and "balance" of the information presented to us by the media. A few days back it was said that advertising money had passed the $800,000,000 mark and was slated to go over a billion dollars before the election.
So, we have an extremely close race on the National stage! Battleground Advertising! Big Money for the MSM (which includes Fox)! Everyone vying to squeeze the most out of the new windfall provided by the Citizens United ruling. Actually creating a balance that likely doesn't exist. Poll after poll with just the right wiggly little margin of error. Refraining almost constantly from even comparing crowd sizes at the opponents similar events. Rarely providing even a photo angle that would discern that... That's different people!! Many things are different now for us and likely due to the cash influx.
Gotta have a tight race... Gotta present it so it appears believable... Gotta manage the poll bounce (magnify or nullify)... Gotta keep the cash cow giving and not let it stray off until it's fully milked... and worst of all... Gotta put out stories near the end that say the Super PAC's aren't so bad.
I guess their not if they expand your profits from the election cycle many times over what they've been before.
I believe they've completely corrupted our political process in this way and tainted it forever. In addition to all the expected crap too.
Citizens United unleashed the beast. These are the ones trying to buy this election.
In his new report, America For Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, Sen. Bernie Sanders named names and called out the billionaires who using Citizens United to buy our democracy.
In front of a Senate panel today, Sen. Bernie Sanders outed the 26 billionaires who are members of 23 billionaire families that are using Citizens United to buy elections. Sen. Sanders estimated that these 26 billionaires are the tip of the iceberg. “My guess is that number is really much greater because many of these contributions are made in secret. In other words, not content to own our economy, the 1 percent want to own our government as well.”
Sanders explained how the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision put the government up for sale, “What the Supreme Court did in Citizens United is to say to these same billionaires and the corporations they control: ‘You own and control the economy, you own Wall Street, you own the coal companies, you own the oil companies. Now, for a very small percentage of your wealth, we’re going to give you the opportunity to own the United States government.’”
Sen. Sanders also did the last thing the billionaires wanted. He called them out by name.
According to the report, America for Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, here are the 26 billionaires who are trying to buy your government:
1). Sheldon Adelson, owner of the Las Vegas Sands Casino, is worth nearly $25 billion, making him the 14th wealthiest person in the world and the 7th richest person in America. While median family income plummeted by nearly 40% from 2007-2010, Mr. Adelson has experienced a nearly eightfold increase in his wealth over the past three years (from $3.4 billion to $24.9 billion). Forbes recently reported that Adelson is willing to spend a “limitless” amount of money or more than $100 million to help defeat President Obama in November.
2. The Kochs (David, Charles, and William) are worth a combined $103 billion, according to Forbes. They have pledged to spend about $400 million during the 2012 election season. The Kochs own more wealth than the bottom 41.7 percent of American households or more than 49 million Americans.
3. Jim Walton is worth $23.7 billion. He has donated $300,000 to super PACs in 2012.
4. Harold Simmons is worth $9 billion. He has donated $15.2 million to super PACs this year.
5. Peter Thiel is worth $1.5 billion. He has donated $6.7 million to Super PACs this year.
6. Jerrold Perenchio is worth $2.3 billion. He has donated $2.6 million to super PACs this year.
7. Kenneth Griffin is worth $3 billion and he has given $2.08 million to super PACs in 2012.
8. James Simons is worth $10.7 billion and he has given $1.5 million to super Pacs this year.
9. Julian Robertson is worth $2.5 billion and he has given $1.25 million to super PACs this year.
10. Robert Rowling is worth $4.8 billion and he has given $1.1 million to super PACs.
11. John Paulson, the hedge fund manager who made his fortune betting that the sub-prime mortgage market would collapse, is worth $12.5 billion. He has donated $1 million to super PACs.
12. Richard and J.W. Marriott are worth a combined $3.1 billion and they have donated $2 million to super PACs this year.
13. James Davis is worth $1.9 billion and he has given $1 million to super PACs this year.
14. Harold Hamm is worth $11 billion and he has given $985,000 to super PACs this year.
15. Kenny Trout is worth more than $1.2 billion and he has given $900,000 to super PACs this year.
16. Louis Bacon is worth $1.4 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
17. Bruce Kovner is worth $4.5 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
18. Warren Stephens is worth $2.7 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
19. David Tepper is worth $5.1 billion and he has given $375,000 to super PACs this year.
20. Samuel Zell is worth $4.9 billion and he has given $270,000 to super PACs this year.
21. Leslie Wexner is worth $4.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
22. Charles Schwab is worth $3.5 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
23. Kelcy Warren is worth $2.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
The thing that these billionaires love most about Citizens United it is that it allows them to operate in total darkness. The American people couldn’t fight back because the billionaires were giving their money anonymously. This same cloak of invisibility is what made ALEC so effective for years. The conservative billionaire cabal works best in private, behind closed doors, far away from curious eyes.
With his report today, Sen. Sanders has made it more difficult for thieves of liberty to keep operating in the night. We now have a list of names and we know what they are trying to do to our government. Sen. Sanders is one of the few federally elected officials who has the courage to talk about these people in public.
Most of the members of the House and Senate are too afraid to speak of, much less take on, the billionaires. Even those decent members of Congress who might speak out against them have been terrified into silence by threats of multimillion dollar negative ad buys that will run against the incumbent back home.
Bernie Sanders is displaying a brand of political courage that is sorely lacking in American politics today, and he needs you to stand with him to protect our liberties, our freedoms, and to battle to return the government back to the American people.
Bernie Sanders Exposes the 26 Billionaires who are Buying the 2012 Election
miklkit, excellent post. I think we can put a "sold" sign on America.
Until Citizens United is rejected and democracy restored to this country We The People will not control it.
Hey NBC,
How many people have you hired with all the superpac buys in all your markets?
It is disgusting the amount of money that is a washed in this election cycle from these pacs.
And your statement that these are "" seasoned professional"is nothing but a bunch of ex elected officials living off the largess of the old rich guys.
I sympatize for the folks who live in swing states, hope you all turned off your televison and put your phone on voice mail.
Northstar, that and they have a huge recycling bin for all of the garbage that winds up in their mail!
Obama/Biden 2012
NorthstarDFl hit the nail on the head. Media wants to sell all the ads they can and they don't care if the ads are factual or not. It's just business.
I DVR quite a bit and if I happen to be watching something live, I mute it -- no matter who it's about. I think Super Pacs, foreign investors, companies, unions, and whatever self interest group should get out. This is the MOST negative campaign I've seen since I started voting 38 yrs ago. It's totally distorted. It should be about issues and stances, not who can twist and spin those weak minded into believing their crap.
Sorry, but unions are groups of INDIVIDUALS collectively working together. They are nothing like a corporation and should not be treated the same. I know some of you right-wing types by into the anti-union rhetoric from corporations but it is Malarkey! If we go after unions we should go after churches for their blatant political activism despite being non-profit organizations.
I disagree that Super Pacs haven't harmed the system. I saw a big poster on the way to work today that said:
Politicans All Lie, No One in 2012.
Americans becoming even more jaded and distrustful of political campaigns is not a harmless development, in my opinion. Another problem is the crisis in journalism we see happening this election. I think voters are becoming less and less trusting of our system.
Amy,
I so agree about Americans becoming more jaded and distrustful. Also, as the ads don't need to be approved by anyone, they paint a very different picture of the politicians other than who they are. Facts are not necessary for their ads.
Obama/Biden 2012
Maybe if corporations weren't allowed to spend so much money on campaign contributions they could... oh, i dunno.... HIRE SOME MORE PEOPLE!!!!!!
I agree, Amy. The superpacs have damaged our election process. They are unaccountable in their donors and in the lies they can tell.
Maybe if corporations weren't allowed to spend so much money on campaign contributions they could...
Broke -
Ask them to pay 1% more in taxes, and they go up for grabs. Yet, they have no problems pumping millions into a campaign. A losing campaign at that....LOL
O&Joe 2012
Politicans All Lie, No One in 2012.
------------------------------------------------------
Damnit! I told them NOBODY...NOBODY, not no one...sheesh!
No Respect!
NOBODY-
Has a perfect record when it comes to telling the truth...
Nobody 2012
Is that you, Wavy Gravy? Probably was Nobody 2012 :)
That is possibly Governor Romney's cousin Hugh...and a pretty amazing person..
NOBODY-
Can bring red America and Blue America together over a bowl of...Ben and Jerry's...
The media (pretty much all of them) are letting the country down. They are not true journalists anymore, they are all owned by corps. Liberal media my ass. The sale of our government to the plutocrats subverts democracy.
This is exactly what Ike warned the American population about when he said "beware the military/industrial complex." There hasn't been a sane politician since Ike (and he would have been the ONLY GOP I would have voted for, but I was too young then.)
That is also why I have been a "Vote NO VOTE" campaigner for the past nearly two decades and why I helped start the PAM noted in #1.44 back in August 2010, as a result of complaints here on Newsvine about CU and the huge amounts of money being spent on Congressional and state races. I was involved in a Congressional campaign in NW OH in 1968 as a college student, and I got a real eyeful of how politics work. I declared myself a GDI in Ohio right after that election and the completion of my college paper on the campaign (I did it as part of a self-written major at the small college I was attending). Candidates will say whatever they think the voters want to hear, then go to DC and do only that which will line their own pockets and the pockets of their closest friends and big financial supporters.
I have an idea. Make a OUTRIGHT LIE in a political commercial a CAPITAL CRIME. Call it TREASON against the Republic and have the person responsible SLOWLY STRANGLED on live TV.
THAT would make our political discourse more accurate!
When a politician lies there will be some voters who are swayed by the lie and some voters who are disgusted by it. A politician's lies are only tempered by his/her judgment whether the number swayed will exceed the number disgusted.
So many of the posts here have criticized all the lying done by both the candidates. Did you know that candidates have an explicit legal right to lie to voters just as much as they want? That means they must lie if they want to win.
Consumers have been protected for decades from false ads for commercial products. 18 U.S.C. 1001 makes it a crime to "knowingly...make any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement" to a federal agent. And yet, again and again, the right of politicians to lie outrageously has been supported by the courts and other politicians.
Given the political advantage of telling lies to a naïve public, don't expect any politician to stop lying! The candidate that tells only the truth, will lose. This will remain true either until our lawmakers stop treating themselves like a privileged elite ruling class, or lying produces a political disadvantage. That is to say, we better just get used to it and start finding the truth for ourselves.
Here are the Billionaires who are trying to buy this election.
In his new report, America For Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, Sen. Bernie Sanders named names and called out the billionaires who using Citizens United to buy our democracy.
In front of a Senate panel today, Sen. Bernie Sanders outed the 26 billionaires who are members of 23 billionaire families that are using Citizens United to buy elections. Sen. Sanders estimated that these 26 billionaires are the tip of the iceberg. “My guess is that number is really much greater because many of these contributions are made in secret. In other words, not content to own our economy, the 1 percent want to own our government as well.”
Sanders explained how the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision put the government up for sale, “What the Supreme Court did in Citizens United is to say to these same billionaires and the corporations they control: ‘You own and control the economy, you own Wall Street, you own the coal companies, you own the oil companies. Now, for a very small percentage of your wealth, we’re going to give you the opportunity to own the United States government.’”
Sen. Sanders also did the last thing the billionaires wanted. He called them out by name.
According to the report, America for Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, here are the 26 billionaires who are trying to buy your government:
1). Sheldon Adelson, owner of the Las Vegas Sands Casino, is worth nearly $25 billion, making him the 14th wealthiest person in the world and the 7th richest person in America. While median family income plummeted by nearly 40% from 2007-2010, Mr. Adelson has experienced a nearly eightfold increase in his wealth over the past three years (from $3.4 billion to $24.9 billion). Forbes recently reported that Adelson is willing to spend a “limitless” amount of money or more than $100 million to help defeat President Obama in November.
2. The Kochs (David, Charles, and William) are worth a combined $103 billion, according to Forbes. They have pledged to spend about $400 million during the 2012 election season. The Kochs own more wealth than the bottom 41.7 percent of American households or more than 49 million Americans.
3. Jim Walton is worth $23.7 billion. He has donated $300,000 to super PACs in 2012.
4. Harold Simmons is worth $9 billion. He has donated $15.2 million to super PACs this year.
5. Peter Thiel is worth $1.5 billion. He has donated $6.7 million to Super PACs this year.
6. Jerrold Perenchio is worth $2.3 billion. He has donated $2.6 million to super PACs this year.
7. Kenneth Griffin is worth $3 billion and he has given $2.08 million to super PACs in 2012.
8. James Simons is worth $10.7 billion and he has given $1.5 million to super Pacs this year.
9. Julian Robertson is worth $2.5 billion and he has given $1.25 million to super PACs this year.
10. Robert Rowling is worth $4.8 billion and he has given $1.1 million to super PACs.
11. John Paulson, the hedge fund manager who made his fortune betting that the sub-prime mortgage market would collapse, is worth $12.5 billion. He has donated $1 million to super PACs.
12. Richard and J.W. Marriott are worth a combined $3.1 billion and they have donated $2 million to super PACs this year.
13. James Davis is worth $1.9 billion and he has given $1 million to super PACs this year.
14. Harold Hamm is worth $11 billion and he has given $985,000 to super PACs this year.
15. Kenny Trout is worth more than $1.2 billion and he has given $900,000 to super PACs this year.
16. Louis Bacon is worth $1.4 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
17. Bruce Kovner is worth $4.5 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
18. Warren Stephens is worth $2.7 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
19. David Tepper is worth $5.1 billion and he has given $375,000 to super PACs this year.
20. Samuel Zell is worth $4.9 billion and he has given $270,000 to super PACs this year.
21. Leslie Wexner is worth $4.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
22. Charles Schwab is worth $3.5 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
23. Kelcy Warren is worth $2.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
The thing that these billionaires love most about Citizens United it is that it allows them to operate in total darkness. The American people couldn’t fight back because the billionaires were giving their money anonymously. This same cloak of invisibility is what made ALEC so effective for years. The conservative billionaire cabal works best in private, behind closed doors, far away from curious eyes.
With his report today, Sen. Sanders has made it more difficult for thieves of liberty to keep operating in the night. We now have a list of names and we know what they are trying to do to our government. Sen. Sanders is one of the few federally elected officials who has the courage to talk about these people in public.
Most of the members of the House and Senate are too afraid to speak of, much less take on, the billionaires. Even those decent members of Congress who might speak out against them have been terrified into silence by threats of multimillion dollar negative ad buys that will run against the incumbent back home.
Bernie Sanders is displaying a brand of political courage that is sorely lacking in American politics today, and he needs you to stand with him to protect our liberties, our freedoms, and to battle to return the government back to the American people.
Bernie Sanders Exposes the 26 Billionaires who are Buying the 2012 Election
Funny, it was widely reported that billionaire George Soros gave 1million to a super-PAC supporting the Democratic Party and Mr. Political Courage didn't mention that (or at least you didn't report him mentioning it). Doesn't sound like he is truly trying to protect our liberties as much as he is engaging in a typical partisanship hack job. Truly great politics is reporting both sides of the story and Bernie Sanders failed to do that, at least according to your post.
Get private money out of politics. That means PACs, Super PACs, direct campaign contributions AND self-funding by the candidates themselves... Limited public funds only!
Elections should be fought on the basis of platform and ideas, not money. Elected officials should only be accountable to VOTERS, not just those of us with the deepest pockets!
The problem I see with that is, it gives incumbents a huge advantage because they can still use their office to fund their campaign. (ex: sending out material "explaining" to the electorate that they voted for X bill and here is how it's helped the community)
Or telling their constituents that they got the money for the district, but in reality voted against the funding bill. A typical ploy of many politicians is the porkbarrel activity, where they will load a bill with their pork, knowing that the bill will get passed even without their positive vote, then push to get the money from that pork sent to their district. That is why the ECFR amendment spells out very clearly how campaigns are to be funded.
Here is a pretty good summary of the Democrat's stance on this over the years:
In 2008 Democrats have an almost 2-1 spending advantage and Senator McCain offers to go only public funding as long as the Democrats will too. Democrats scream that this is an unconstitutional assaut on their right to free speech.
In 2012 Spending is virtually equal at about 1 trillion for each party. Democrats scream private funding is ruining the election.
Nice little flip-flop there. Oh that's right, only Republicans flip-flop, Democrats "evolve." :)
Figure out what your position really is on this and then we'll talk.
My bad, that should read: 1 billion each. Sorry for the mistake and I'll try to do better next time.
Actuallly, the problem is not Citizens United but all of the previous cases that allowed outside groups to do electioneering outside of being regular pacs with unlimited contributions by one or two individuals.
What qualifies as a Bogeyman is in the eye of the beholder. Current campaign finance law (as found in the statutes) is based on the theory that campaign spending should be in some way democratic. If you want to spend large sums of money in a race, you need to get support from a large number of people.
What the Supreme Court has said is that a handful of people who can give ten million have the right to outshout those thousands who actually gave to a candidate. That's not a free and fair marketplace of ideas. More importantly, it is not conducive to encouraging politicians to put the needs of the country above the desire of the few who can spend such large sums of money in campaigns.
Story reported as inaccurate.
Agreed. It's not hard to see how major TV networks benefit from virtually unlimited campaign ad spending that Super PACs bring about - clearly a conflict of interest here.
I call shenanigans!
And much of that ad money is going right back into the pockets of the very people who donated the money, since they are the principal shareholders of the companies in many instances. They sure haven't hired any new people in the media for all of those ad buys. It's just more profit for the owners of the corporations.
This was inevitable after the 2008 election. Both major party candidates agreed to run publicly funded campaigns in 2008. The candidate who kept his word was beaten badly. The candidate who lied through his teeth spent $750 Million and won easily.
That is a really dumb Headline. All you have to do is just turn on your T.V. and look at all the Super-PAC trash that is spewed all over the networks.
Completely bogus analysis. How can you possibly say that the Super PACs haven't had a negative influence on this campaign? Oh yeah -- that's right, NBC is among the financial beneficiaries of the Super PAC era. Flooding the airwaves with BS is unAmerican. Especially since the only ones who can afford to do it are in service of the Republicrat duopoly. Citizens United has been every bit as bad for democracy as I'd anticipated, and it will only get worse.
I would prefer it if outside groups that faced no ramifications for paying for ads that are out and out lies were somehow eliminated from the process, but sadly, I cannot think of a way to do it that would not infringe on the 1st amendment. Unfortunately, people tend to believe sensationalistic lies because, frankly, the truth is often boring and it a lot harder to make the boring truth sound as interesting as a sexy lie.
I understand the First Amendment concerns, but see no reason why there can't be a requirement for full disclosure of contributors.
The First Amendment protects free speech, not anonymous speech.
"Papa John" has a right to hold a fundraiser for Romney and speak out against Obamacare, I have a right to order my pizza from somewhere else.
Here they are. The ones who are trying to buy this election.
In his new report, America For Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, Sen. Bernie Sanders named names and called out the billionaires who using Citizens United to buy our democracy.
In front of a Senate panel today, Sen. Bernie Sanders outed the 26 billionaires who are members of 23 billionaire families that are using Citizens United to buy elections. Sen. Sanders estimated that these 26 billionaires are the tip of the iceberg. “My guess is that number is really much greater because many of these contributions are made in secret. In other words, not content to own our economy, the 1 percent want to own our government as well.”
Sanders explained how the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision put the government up for sale, “What the Supreme Court did in Citizens United is to say to these same billionaires and the corporations they control: ‘You own and control the economy, you own Wall Street, you own the coal companies, you own the oil companies. Now, for a very small percentage of your wealth, we’re going to give you the opportunity to own the United States government.’”
Sen. Sanders also did the last thing the billionaires wanted. He called them out by name.
According to the report, America for Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, here are the 26 billionaires who are trying to buy your government:
1). Sheldon Adelson, owner of the Las Vegas Sands Casino, is worth nearly $25 billion, making him the 14th wealthiest person in the world and the 7th richest person in America. While median family income plummeted by nearly 40% from 2007-2010, Mr. Adelson has experienced a nearly eightfold increase in his wealth over the past three years (from $3.4 billion to $24.9 billion). Forbes recently reported that Adelson is willing to spend a “limitless” amount of money or more than $100 million to help defeat President Obama in November.
2. The Kochs (David, Charles, and William) are worth a combined $103 billion, according to Forbes. They have pledged to spend about $400 million during the 2012 election season. The Kochs own more wealth than the bottom 41.7 percent of American households or more than 49 million Americans.
3. Jim Walton is worth $23.7 billion. He has donated $300,000 to super PACs in 2012.
4. Harold Simmons is worth $9 billion. He has donated $15.2 million to super PACs this year.
5. Peter Thiel is worth $1.5 billion. He has donated $6.7 million to Super PACs this year.
6. Jerrold Perenchio is worth $2.3 billion. He has donated $2.6 million to super PACs this year.
7. Kenneth Griffin is worth $3 billion and he has given $2.08 million to super PACs in 2012.
8. James Simons is worth $10.7 billion and he has given $1.5 million to super Pacs this year.
9. Julian Robertson is worth $2.5 billion and he has given $1.25 million to super PACs this year.
10. Robert Rowling is worth $4.8 billion and he has given $1.1 million to super PACs.
11. John Paulson, the hedge fund manager who made his fortune betting that the sub-prime mortgage market would collapse, is worth $12.5 billion. He has donated $1 million to super PACs.
12. Richard and J.W. Marriott are worth a combined $3.1 billion and they have donated $2 million to super PACs this year.
13. James Davis is worth $1.9 billion and he has given $1 million to super PACs this year.
14. Harold Hamm is worth $11 billion and he has given $985,000 to super PACs this year.
15. Kenny Trout is worth more than $1.2 billion and he has given $900,000 to super PACs this year.
16. Louis Bacon is worth $1.4 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
17. Bruce Kovner is worth $4.5 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
18. Warren Stephens is worth $2.7 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
19. David Tepper is worth $5.1 billion and he has given $375,000 to super PACs this year.
20. Samuel Zell is worth $4.9 billion and he has given $270,000 to super PACs this year.
21. Leslie Wexner is worth $4.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
22. Charles Schwab is worth $3.5 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
23. Kelcy Warren is worth $2.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
The thing that these billionaires love most about Citizens United it is that it allows them to operate in total darkness. The American people couldn’t fight back because the billionaires were giving their money anonymously. This same cloak of invisibility is what made ALEC so effective for years. The conservative billionaire cabal works best in private, behind closed doors, far away from curious eyes.
With his report today, Sen. Sanders has made it more difficult for thieves of liberty to keep operating in the night. We now have a list of names and we know what they are trying to do to our government. Sen. Sanders is one of the few federally elected officials who has the courage to talk about these people in public.
Most of the members of the House and Senate are too afraid to speak of, much less take on, the billionaires. Even those decent members of Congress who might speak out against them have been terrified into silence by threats of multimillion dollar negative ad buys that will run against the incumbent back home.
Bernie Sanders is displaying a brand of political courage that is sorely lacking in American politics today, and he needs you to stand with him to protect our liberties, our freedoms, and to battle to return the government back to the American people.
Bernie Sanders Exposes the 26 Billionaires who are Buying the 2012 Election
Jesus H. Christ, what the hell world do YOU live in? Not the bogeyman everyone feared? They're way BEYOND the worse that anyone feared. All that extra money WILL get Romney and other Republicans elected. Just like the $70,000,000 Rick Scott spent of his own money to buy the governor's office in Florida. You people at NBC should find other jobs.
You know they work. You support the man who spent $750 Million to defeat a publicly funded opponent in 2008.
Bob-
McCain filed to get out of the public financing agreement during the 2008 Republican primaries when his fund raising improved but did not get a decision in time.
McCain also relied on extensive spending by 527 groups.
Check your facts.
This is the shoddiest piece of political "journalism" I've read from NBCnews.com. The communications directors of American Crossroads and the NRCC are the sources for refutations of Democratic concerns about the influence of outside money? I guess Mr. O'Brien is reporting, leaving it to us to decide. Please please please raise your standards a little.
AMAZING! Now that they admit Obama was funded by super-pacs, too, they're suddenly OK.
Wait til they say it's now okay that he gets FOREIGN money!
Does it bother you that Mitt Romney held fundraisers and accepted foreign campaign contributions while in Israel and the UK, or do you reserve your outrage only for Obama?
Not real good at reading the fine print, are ya? But then the moniker "flbikerchick" would indicate a certain lack of eddycashun.
"Romney's finance event marked the first time a presidential candidate has raised cash in Israel. The campaign accepted contributions only' from American citizens..."
But Obama's Obama campaign “lacks the industry-standard level of credit card security for donations,” but “uses it for merchandise purchases” on the campaign store. Donors on the official Obama site don’t need to include their credit card security number, the three- or four-digit code found on every card.
The Obama campaign previously claimed it doesn’t need that code — called the CVV — because “they are able to vet contributions on the back end using sophisticated techniques that it doesn’t disclose,” claims the report (the Obama campaign since said it uses an Address Verification System to verify credit cards).
Second, the report highlights Obama.com, a domain that’s not owned by the Obama campaign but points to a campaign donation page. According to the GAI, a majority of traffic to that site has come from abroad:
Super PACs haven't become the bogeyman many feared
Left off "yet." And of course, the next step is anonymous, unlimited donations directly to the candidates' campaign funds. Anyone who thinks super PACs aren't a serious threat to our democratic system is an idiot. Or a politician.
Private citizens with a need for political help, who have deep pockets, and an unlimited supply of money to "contribute" towards political campaigns are just as dangerous as any PAC or Super PAC .
All campaigns in this country, especially Presidential campaigns, should be publicly funded, and BOTH candidates should have the same amount of cash to spend.
In short, everybody should play by the same rules.
But, that will never happen and we all know it.
Citizens, there is nothing to be alarmed about. In the singular case of political campaigning, super PACs are exactly like any other political instrumentYou are safe. Go back to your work and make this a productive country! There is no need for campaign finance reform!
Sheesh. Get real. We have politicians continually whoring themselves for a $5K a plate dinner. $10 million buys a TON of access. THAT is the problem with Super PACs. This article has all the hallmarks of "press release journalism." Maybe we should ask the author to disclose exactly how he came to his conclusion, or how this article even came up. Oh yeah, "journalistic ethics" would preclude that.
Op Ed masquerading as journalism. Reminds me of Conrad Black holding his "We beat the Internet party. " Shear b.s.
OBAMA'S LIE EXPOSED
From Reuters, updated 10/23/2012 9:36:42 PM ET WASHINGTON — “Officials at the White House and State Department were advised only two hours after attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September 11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.
“The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.
“The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.”
Obama has been caught in a huge lie to the American people. No amount of media spin is going to make this one go away!
I bet Karl Rove sat up all night writing the text for those emails. It's really easy to spoof faked stuff and fob it off. How much of Reuters does Romney own now? What a pity they weren't 'discovered' in time for Monday's debate.
Hey Kannin...the LIB TARDS won't buy this anyway. Don't waste your time. Facts mean nothing...its just how they "roll"....BARRY/BIDEN/BIRD BIRD - 2012.
Here are the Billionaires trying to buy this election. Stop them.
In his new report, America For Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, Sen. Bernie Sanders named names and called out the billionaires who using Citizens United to buy our democracy.
In front of a Senate panel today, Sen. Bernie Sanders outed the 26 billionaires who are members of 23 billionaire families that are using Citizens United to buy elections. Sen. Sanders estimated that these 26 billionaires are the tip of the iceberg. “My guess is that number is really much greater because many of these contributions are made in secret. In other words, not content to own our economy, the 1 percent want to own our government as well.”
Sanders explained how the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision put the government up for sale, “What the Supreme Court did in Citizens United is to say to these same billionaires and the corporations they control: ‘You own and control the economy, you own Wall Street, you own the coal companies, you own the oil companies. Now, for a very small percentage of your wealth, we’re going to give you the opportunity to own the United States government.’”
Sen. Sanders also did the last thing the billionaires wanted. He called them out by name.
According to the report, America for Sale: A Report on Billionaires Buying the 2012 Election, here are the 26 billionaires who are trying to buy your government:
1). Sheldon Adelson, owner of the Las Vegas Sands Casino, is worth nearly $25 billion, making him the 14th wealthiest person in the world and the 7th richest person in America. While median family income plummeted by nearly 40% from 2007-2010, Mr. Adelson has experienced a nearly eightfold increase in his wealth over the past three years (from $3.4 billion to $24.9 billion). Forbes recently reported that Adelson is willing to spend a “limitless” amount of money or more than $100 million to help defeat President Obama in November.
2. The Kochs (David, Charles, and William) are worth a combined $103 billion, according to Forbes. They have pledged to spend about $400 million during the 2012 election season. The Kochs own more wealth than the bottom 41.7 percent of American households or more than 49 million Americans.
3. Jim Walton is worth $23.7 billion. He has donated $300,000 to super PACs in 2012.
4. Harold Simmons is worth $9 billion. He has donated $15.2 million to super PACs this year.
5. Peter Thiel is worth $1.5 billion. He has donated $6.7 million to Super PACs this year.
6. Jerrold Perenchio is worth $2.3 billion. He has donated $2.6 million to super PACs this year.
7. Kenneth Griffin is worth $3 billion and he has given $2.08 million to super PACs in 2012.
8. James Simons is worth $10.7 billion and he has given $1.5 million to super Pacs this year.
9. Julian Robertson is worth $2.5 billion and he has given $1.25 million to super PACs this year.
10. Robert Rowling is worth $4.8 billion and he has given $1.1 million to super PACs.
11. John Paulson, the hedge fund manager who made his fortune betting that the sub-prime mortgage market would collapse, is worth $12.5 billion. He has donated $1 million to super PACs.
12. Richard and J.W. Marriott are worth a combined $3.1 billion and they have donated $2 million to super PACs this year.
13. James Davis is worth $1.9 billion and he has given $1 million to super PACs this year.
14. Harold Hamm is worth $11 billion and he has given $985,000 to super PACs this year.
15. Kenny Trout is worth more than $1.2 billion and he has given $900,000 to super PACs this year.
16. Louis Bacon is worth $1.4 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
17. Bruce Kovner is worth $4.5 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
18. Warren Stephens is worth $2.7 billion and he has given $500,000 to super PACs this year.
19. David Tepper is worth $5.1 billion and he has given $375,000 to super PACs this year.
20. Samuel Zell is worth $4.9 billion and he has given $270,000 to super PACs this year.
21. Leslie Wexner is worth $4.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
22. Charles Schwab is worth $3.5 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
23. Kelcy Warren is worth $2.3 billion and he has given $250,000 to super PACs this year.
The thing that these billionaires love most about Citizens United it is that it allows them to operate in total darkness. The American people couldn’t fight back because the billionaires were giving their money anonymously. This same cloak of invisibility is what made ALEC so effective for years. The conservative billionaire cabal works best in private, behind closed doors, far away from curious eyes.
With his report today, Sen. Sanders has made it more difficult for thieves of liberty to keep operating in the night. We now have a list of names and we know what they are trying to do to our government. Sen. Sanders is one of the few federally elected officials who has the courage to talk about these people in public.
Most of the members of the House and Senate are too afraid to speak of, much less take on, the billionaires. Even those decent members of Congress who might speak out against them have been terrified into silence by threats of multimillion dollar negative ad buys that will run against the incumbent back home.
Bernie Sanders is displaying a brand of political courage that is sorely lacking in American politics today, and he needs you to stand with him to protect our liberties, our freedoms, and to battle to return the government back to the American people.
Bernie Sanders Exposes the 26 Billionaires who are Buying the 2012 Election
"The outside group can serve the purpose of providing cover to the challenger while the incumbent attempts to define the challenger with dramatically lopsided resources,"//Paid for puppets. The one with the most money is always elected by the 1%. Obama has a lot of money more than romney , what does that tell you as he wages secret wars ? The war machine must be fed and Obama does it best.
This article is absurd, we now have just a handful of multi-millionaires, billionaires and multi-billionaires trying to buy their candidates into public office. How could that possible be good for our democracy. Whomever penned this opinion piece is silly!
Cut the semantics. When a few individuals can have more financial impact than hundreds of millions of mainstream Americans, something is frighteningly wrong. Period.
And to think that 50% of our population are Hell-bent to give that few virtually complete legislative control as well as economic power. I'm at a loss for words.
The Mormon Cult - The Ultimate Super-PAC
"How Mitt Romney Does Business"
"In Utah, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have been caught in multimillion-dollar Ponzi schemes and other forms of fraud conducted by fellow church-goers.
Deaf people, the Vietnamese, military families and co-workers also have been targeted. " The Salt Lake Tribune (First Published Dec 31 2010 03:33 pm)
This is how many “Mormons Do Business" - pretty similar to how Scientologist's do business. Lie, cheat, - say whatever it takes to win (with a clear conscience). Hmmm - sounds familiar.
We have public service type TV advertisements warning people and the elderly not to trust someone because they are members of your church. Yes!!! There are very evil, greedy people that take advantage of people and their good faith. In the same breath there are also loving, giving and kind people, too. I would never, ever trust Romney, not ever!!!!!
The Mormon Cult - The Ultimate Super-PAC
"How Mitt Romney Does Business"
"In Utah, members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints have been caught in multimillion-dollar Ponzi schemes and other forms of fraud conducted by fellow church-goers.
Deaf people, the Vietnamese, military families and co-workers also have been targeted. " The Salt Lake Tribune (First Published Dec 31 2010 03:33 pm)
This is how many “Mormons Do Business" - pretty similar to how Scientologist's do business. Lie, cheat, - say whatever it takes to win (with a clear conscience). Hmmm - sounds familiar.
Old News!
Not
They must work for the demonrats after all, otherwise, the demonicrats would be screaming foul or worse!
Obviously the person writing this article favors the right wing, since they did not put any emphasis on how a few really rich people, like the Koch brothers are donating huge amounts of money to influence the election to favor themselves and buy some legislative favors.
What these Super-Pacs are really doing is making marginal candidate that should be easily defeated into competitive candidates due to a lot of TV ads, spin, and generally misleading political BS. In turn it has made the "little guy" buck up and donate more out of their pocket to the generally Democratic Pacs to offset the Koch and other rich people trying to buy the election. I really hate how this has become.
Who owns this network...Rupert Murdoch???
Since the SCOTUS decision to LEGALIZE GREENBACK "FREE SPEECH" with the Citizens United ruling, we have now become at risk from MASSIVE CORRUPTION of a scale that only your imagination can conjure.
Though it will be nearly impossible to achieve because of the Republican and Corporate control of the US House of Representatives, THIS NATION DESPERATELY NEEDS LAWS TO CONTROL THE FREE FLOW OF CORPORATE AND INDIVIDUAL MEGA DONATIONS THAT LITERALLY "BUY" OUR GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATIVES.
These are dark times for our Republic...and it will only get worse unless we act against the existence of these cash funneling CORRUPTING vehicles.
One if by land, two if by sea.
The SuperPACs have many tools with which to influence the vote. For instance a Super-PAC could engage in a voter registration effort, a get-out-the-vote effort, call-banks, direct mail and so on. They don't need to be just confined to TV ads. They also can use their influence and money to elect candidates from local judges and state representatives all the way up to the president. I would say Super Pacs are definately NOT a good developement for democracy.