“The GOP’s relentless efforts to dismantle regulatory bodies is directly responsible for the unchecked abuse of our campaign finance system,” said End Citizens United President Tiffany Muller. “By defanging the FEC, Republicans have effectively sabotaged the agency tasked with safeguarding our democracy from corruption. We will continue to help elect Democrats into office who are committed to implementing tough laws to clean up this anything-goes system.”
Politico: Super PACs keep testing the limits of campaign finance law
Jessica Piper
04/08/24
Key sections:
-
Super PACs keep pushing the boundaries of campaign finance law this cycle.
-
They’re using novel financial arrangements, like taking “bridge funding” in the form of undisclosed de facto loans from major donors or receiving ad revenue from a candidate’s podcast. They’re also continuing to take advantage of long standing loopholes in anti-coordination guidelines.
-
The willingness to push the boundaries suggests that U.S. politics has entered the Wild West campaign financing system that many observers predicted would come in the wake of the court’s weakening campaign finance laws.
-
It comes as super PACs are taking a more prominent role in campaigning. Total spending on independent expenditures so far this cycle is nearly 2.5 times what it was at this point in 2020. And because candidates are having more and more trouble with small-dollar fundraising, super PAC money could be even more important as the cycle continues.
-
The 2010 Citizens United decision opened the door for corporations, labor unions and other organizations to spend without limits as long as they don’t coordinate with campaigns. And advocates say the little enforcement since then has empowered groups to take advantage of loopholes.
-
Super PACs can raise unlimited money. That means a wealthy donor who can give only $6,600 to a federal candidate can give millions to an outside group backing them. Importantly, super PACs can also accept contributions from corporations and other entities that are barred from giving directly to candidates. They face few restrictions on spending, other than the coordination prohibition.
-
And outside spending continues to increase dramatically. Across all federal races, super PACs have spent more than $430 million on independent expenditures already this cycle, according to FEC data, up from $176 million at this point in 2020.
-
A super PAC supporting Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent presidential bid has repeatedly accepted million-dollar donations from a security consultant who is also the Kennedy campaign’s largest vendor, only to refund most of them months later. That has allowed the group to tout the contributions as part of its fundraising totals rather than loans it later pays back.
-
The super PAC, American Values 2024, describes the payments and refunds as “bridge funding.” The Democratic National Committee filed a campaign finance complaint about it, although that is not expected to be resolved until after the election.
-
In other instances, Super PACs have begun to bridge the divide between a candidate’s outside ventures and their political pursuits.
-
Ahead of a competitive U.S. Senate race in Texas, iHeartMedia, which is home to a podcast hosted by Sen. Ted Cruz, gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to a super PAC backing Cruz, Truth and Courage PAC.
-
The GOP presidential primary also saw several examples of super PACs going further than they have before.
-
The super PAC backing Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ campaign received attention for first accepting more than $80 million from DeSantis’ former gubernatorial campaign — permitted because the Florida governor had ceded control of the committee before the money was transferred — and then by regularly hosting DeSantis as a “special guest” at events in GOP primary states.
-
The pro-DeSantis super PAC, Never Back Down, was the subject of several campaign finance complaints from outside groups, none of which have been resolved. While enforcement action against the group is unlikely, advocates also say the length of time it takes for the FEC to address complaints makes it easier for super PACs to act without concern.
-
Several super PACs backing GOP presidential candidates also sent fundraising texts and ran digital ads that enabled donors to give directly to campaigns, a practice not seen in previous presidential primaries.
-
Take “redboxing” — when campaigns leave public instructions for super PACs about the messaging that, they believe, would best support their campaign, often highlighted by a literal red box on a campaign website. Ethics watchdogs have long griped that the practice is essentially a form of coordination between super PACs and campaigns, but the FEC has sanctioned it on the basis that public statements do not amount to coordination.
-
More than 200 federal candidates used the practice in the midterms, according to a study published last month in the Election Law Journal. That’s a far greater number than previously documented, and demonstrates how common the practice has become.
-
The continued boundary-pushing has frustrated ethics advocates, who have pushed for the FEC and other entities to up enforcement to little avail.
-
“We filed complaints against super PACs for presidential candidates. They were ignored. We took it to the Justice Department. They ignored it,” said Fred Wertheimer, a lawyer who has been working on campaign finance issues since the 1970s and is now president and CEO of Democracy 21, a nonprofit that has lobbied for stricter campaign finance reform. “And people know that.”
###