Voters have a right to know which wealthy special interests are influencing our votes and our government is spending big bucks to manipulate the political system in their favor. , looking back at the 2024 election, the case decided by the U.S. Supreme Court is clear. This fundamental right has been under threat for over 10 years.
On January 21, 2010, in this case: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC)the court struck down a ban on corporate independent spending, allowing corporations and other outside groups to participate in election campaigns without restriction.
in citizens unitedthe court upheld certain disclosure provisions of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA). inference Rapid disclosure prevents wealthy special interests from dominating the political process, as voters can see who is paying for ads and “give appropriate weight to different speakers and messages.” That would be enough.
The court assumed that unrestricted corporate campaign spending is “independent” and therefore does not pose a threat to corruption or the emergence of corruption.
However, in the years since then, it has become clear that voters are not well-informed about the true sources of campaign finance, and that supposedly independent spending to support candidates and their campaigns is intentionally coordinated. It has become clear that this is often the case.
We are thus left with a campaign finance system that allows wealthy special interests to use unlimited secret spending to drown out the voices of ordinary Americans.
One way this happened is; Super PACcan accept unlimited contributions from nearly any non-foreign source and can spend unlimited amounts to influence the outcome of federal elections.
Super PACs are theoretically required to be transparent about where their money comes from by reporting their fundraising and spending to the FEC. But that transparency is undermined when super PACs report donations from “dark money” groups that secretly fund them. They themselves hide their donors from the public.
Simply knowing that most or all of a super PAC’s money is coming from vaguely named entities that don’t disclose their funds deprives voters of important information. Masu.
This is a bipartisan issue. Major super PACs aligned with leaders of both parties receive tens of millions of dollars, and in some cases most or all of their funding, from groups that hide their donors from the public.
The problem is also exacerbated by record spending each election cycle. Increased campaign spending by corporations and other external parties Almost 900% The 2020 general election expenditures are $14.4 billion,from $5.7 billion 2018 and over $1 billion Black money was being used.
Furthermore, despite this, illegal In order for outside groups to coordinate campaign spending with candidates and political parties, many groups do so because the FEC failed Crack down on super PACs that work with candidates.
The prevalence of this practice shows how the courts assume. citizens united The idea that unlimited campaign spending could be carried out independently was a mistake.
For example, supporters of Carly Fiorina created a super PAC called Carly for America in the run-up to the 2016 presidential primary. “Carly for America” had a nearly identical name to her official campaign committee, “Carly for President.”
Sign event attendees to your super PAC email list, distribute campaign stickers, and help Through pre-event preparations, Carly for America maintained an active presence at most of Fiorina’s campaign events, fulfilling functions traditionally performed by campaign staff.
This example was brazen, but “Curly for America” wasn’t alone. Super PACs are established on a daily basis The candidates’ former aides often contract with the same consultants as the campaigns they support, and candidates regularly appear at fundraising events for the super PACs they support.
Campaign Legal Center (CLC) has filed complaints against multiple people. Democratic Party and Republican Candidates and groups that violated illegal adjustment laws in the years after the incident citizens united Ruling.
Through the 2024 election cycle; citizens united This decision once again enabled record amounts of campaign spending, including large amounts of dark money spending, much of it coordinated by candidates and their super PACs. new and original method.
The main way to reduce the negative impact of this decision is to have Congress approve legislation that would create stronger disclosure and tracking requirements, address FEC malfunctions, ensure that the FEC is better able to crack down on illegal coordination, and protect the rights of voters. It’s about being able to do it. To find out who is spending a lot of money to influence their votes.
To ensure that voters have their voices heard in our democracy, we must ensure that politicians can no longer receive unlimited slush funds from wealthy special interests to support their campaigns. , we need real transparency about who is spending big bucks on elections.
