With Citizens United,
the Supreme Court dismissed the idea that unlimited independent
political expenditures from corporations or unions would lead “to
corruption or the appearance of corruption” and held that “the
appearance of influence or access will not cause the electorate to lose
faith in this democracy.” This startlingly naïve decision, as well as
lower court rulings and F.E.C. policies that rely on it, has given rise
to a campaign system that’s best described as a Hobbesian state of
nature.
Perhaps the most worrisome development in the post-Citizens United world of campaign finance is the political buddy system, whereby one really well-heeled person joins up with one politician and funds his bid almost entirely out of his own pocket, through a supposedly independent super PAC.
Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire casino magnate, is the best known buy-a-candidate giver. He and his family contributed more than $16 million to Winning the Future, a pro-Newt Gingrich super PAC. Without Mr. Adelson, Mr. Gingrich could not have lasted as long he did in the Republican presidential primary.
But The Washington Post reported yesterday that the buddy system goes beyond the presidential race.
In California, Marc Nathanson has spent $100,000 so far to create The Committee to Elect an Effective Valley Congressman super PAC. Not just any Effective Valley Congressman: just one, Howard Berman, a 15-year veteran of the House whose San Fernando Valley district got redistricted and now has to fight to keep his seat.
Mr. Nathanson will expect absolutely nothing in return if Mr. Berman, his friend of 30 years, retains his seat. The “appearance” of access will not lead to the “appearance of corruption,” let alone actual corruption. After all, the Supreme Court said it wouldn’t.
The Berman race is not even the worst example of the customized super PAC.
A Dallas billionaire, Harold Simmons, has spent more than $1 million on two super PACs, one to support David Dewhurst, a candidate for the Senate, the other to attack his opponent, Ted Cruz.
George Holding, a G.O.P. Congressional candidate in North Carolina, started out behind in the polls. Then the American Foundations Committee super PAC spent more than $500,000 in TV ads to support Mr. Holding, and he won his May primary. Can you guess who’s behind the American Foundations Committee? No? Mr. Holding’s wealthy banking family. By the way, Mr. Holding, a former U.S. attorney, launched the corruption case against John Edwards.
Supporters with or without blood ties to a candidate are free to donate $2,500 directly to his campaign, about $30,000 to his national party, $10,000 to his state party, and another $5,000 to the old-fashioned kind of PAC. But that’s so unfair. You just can’t buy a Congressman for that kind of pocket change anymore.
Perhaps the most worrisome development in the post-Citizens United world of campaign finance is the political buddy system, whereby one really well-heeled person joins up with one politician and funds his bid almost entirely out of his own pocket, through a supposedly independent super PAC.
Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire casino magnate, is the best known buy-a-candidate giver. He and his family contributed more than $16 million to Winning the Future, a pro-Newt Gingrich super PAC. Without Mr. Adelson, Mr. Gingrich could not have lasted as long he did in the Republican presidential primary.
But The Washington Post reported yesterday that the buddy system goes beyond the presidential race.
In California, Marc Nathanson has spent $100,000 so far to create The Committee to Elect an Effective Valley Congressman super PAC. Not just any Effective Valley Congressman: just one, Howard Berman, a 15-year veteran of the House whose San Fernando Valley district got redistricted and now has to fight to keep his seat.
Mr. Nathanson will expect absolutely nothing in return if Mr. Berman, his friend of 30 years, retains his seat. The “appearance” of access will not lead to the “appearance of corruption,” let alone actual corruption. After all, the Supreme Court said it wouldn’t.
The Berman race is not even the worst example of the customized super PAC.
A Dallas billionaire, Harold Simmons, has spent more than $1 million on two super PACs, one to support David Dewhurst, a candidate for the Senate, the other to attack his opponent, Ted Cruz.
George Holding, a G.O.P. Congressional candidate in North Carolina, started out behind in the polls. Then the American Foundations Committee super PAC spent more than $500,000 in TV ads to support Mr. Holding, and he won his May primary. Can you guess who’s behind the American Foundations Committee? No? Mr. Holding’s wealthy banking family. By the way, Mr. Holding, a former U.S. attorney, launched the corruption case against John Edwards.
Supporters with or without blood ties to a candidate are free to donate $2,500 directly to his campaign, about $30,000 to his national party, $10,000 to his state party, and another $5,000 to the old-fashioned kind of PAC. But that’s so unfair. You just can’t buy a Congressman for that kind of pocket change anymore.
No comments:
Post a Comment