Independent groups
Institute for Justice: Super PACs Turn Two Years Old
SpeechNow.org and its members, represented by IJ and the Center for Competitive Politics, challenged the federal limits in February 2008. On March 26, 2010, the full D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously held that the limits were unconstitutional as applied to groups like SpeechNow.org, which make no contributions to candidates and spend their money solely on independent political ads. Since then, nearly 300 similar groups—dubbed “super PACs” by the media—have registered with the Federal Election Commission.
Cato Institute: Did Super PACs Harm the 2012 Primaries?
John Samples
Wall Street Journal: Texas Billionaire Doles Out Election’s Biggest Checks
by Monica LangleyFew people want to defeat President Barack Obama more than billionaire Harold Clark Simmons, who is willing to spend many millions of dollars in the quest. As it happens, campaign rules now give him the opportunity.
Politico: FEC OKs Perry super PAC
by Robin BravenderRick Perry’s failed presidential campaign got a green light Thursday to use its leftover cash to start a PAC or super PAC.
The Nation: Why the ACLU Is Wrong About ‘Citizens United’
by Burt NeuborneI’ve marched proudly behind the ACLU’s First Amendment flag for almost fifty years. On campaign finance reform, however, I believe the ACLU’s adamant opposition to limits on massive campaign spending by the superrich gets the constitutional issues wrong. Limiting the power of a few individuals and corporations that exercise disproportionate political influence solely because of their enormous wealth has nothing to do with censoring a speaker’s message; it is desperately needed to preserve the integrity of the egalitarian democracy the First Amendment was designed to protect.
Politico: Of super PACs and corruption
by Richard HasenCan Super PACs and other outside campaign finance groups corrupt?
Roll Call: Ziebart: Time for a Discussion on Campaign Funds
by Geoff ZiebertIn following the ubiquitous publicity surrounding these campaigns, voters have become familiar with — albeit often confused by — buzzwords and catchphrases such as 527s, soft money, hard money, 501(c)(4)s, independent expenditures, bundling, express advocacy, electioneering communications, issues advocacy and political action committees. The latest entry is “super PACs.” Based on media coverage and survey data, voter impressions of this new catchphrase are decidedly negative.
SCOTUS/Judiciary
US News & World Report: Supreme Court Has Made Ugly U.S. Politics Even Uglier
by Brad BannonBut the court’s 2010 Citizens United decision has already changed the complexion of this year’s campaigns. The basis of the court’s decision to allow unlimited corporate political spending was that a corporation is a person and therefore is entitled to freedom of speech under the First Amendment. If a corporation is a person why hasn’t Gov. Rick Perry executed BP for the death and destruction it caused in the Gulf Coast? God knows, real people in Texas have been fried for less.
Disclosure
Bloomberg: DIY Campaign-Finance Reform, With Help From ProPublica
by Kirsten SalyerProPublica’s crowd-sourcing solution invites volunteers to sign up to go their local stations and make scans of the political ad files, which stations are required to make public. In the trial run of the project, volunteers went to five Chicago-area affiliates and posted their findings.
Candidates and parties
Roll Call: Mitt Romney Far Outraises GOP Rivals
by Eliza Newlin CarneyMitt Romney’s campaign remains driven by large donors over small donors, according to an analysis released today by the Campaign Finance Institute, but the former Massachusetts governor is at least tapping some new funding sources.
