- Joined
- Jan 8, 2010
- Messages
- 72,131
- Reaction score
- 58,867
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Interest groups are spending five times as much on the 2010 congressional elections as they did on the last midterms, and they are more secretive than ever about where that money is coming from.
The $80 million spent so far by groups outside the Democratic and Republican parties dwarfs the $16 million spent at this point for the 2006 midterms. In that election, the vast majority of money - more than 90 percent - was disclosed along with donors' identities. This year, that figure has fallen to less than half of the total, according to data analyzed by The Washington Post.
The trends amount to a spending frenzy conducted largely in the shadows.
The bulk of the money is being spent by conservatives, who have swamped their Democratic-aligned competition by 7 to 1 in recent weeks. The wave of spending is made possible in part by a series of Supreme Court rulings unleashing the ability of corporations and interest groups to spend money on politics. Conservative operatives also say they are riding the support of donors upset with Democratic policies they perceive as anti-business.
washingtonpost.com
There we have it folks. The businesses are starting to hijack our democracy thanks to the supreme court. Welcome to the beginning of the end. Hopefully I can store up enough money to emigrate before it gets really bad.
There we have it folks. The businesses are starting to hijack our democracy thanks to the supreme court.
"The issue of campaign fundraising is casting a shadow over this year's races after a Supreme Court ruling in January allowed unlimited campaign spending by corporations, labor unions and interest groups — some of which are not required to disclose their funding sources...."
As a consequence, the Chamber of Commerce has spent over $85 million to Republican campaigns and ads and no one really knows who their donors are. What they do know is that the Chamber of Commerce has been putting all the money it recieves from it's members and donors, including foreign entities, into a "general fund" in DC and it has been paying out of that general fund to Republican campaigns.
"Foreign spending in U.S. elections is against the law."
Chamber of Commerce faces foreign funding row - latimes.com
Tita Freeman, vice president of communications at the Chamber, called the Center for American Progress report "unfounded and completely erroneous." The foreign companies cited in the report "pay nominal dues" that "do not support U.S. Chamber political activities," Freeman said.
It doesn't matter what the CoC says, the public has a right to know if a foreign company is buying influence in our elections and if the CoC can't prove they aren't, then they are in deep doo doo with the law.You cut off your excerpt right before this part:
Just throwing out numbers, imagine that the CoC takes in $100m in US donations and $5m in foreign donations. Now imagine that they spend $50m on electioneering. That does not mean that they used foreign funding to produce those ads.
It doesn't matter what the CoC says, the public has a right to know if a foreign company is buying influence in our elections and if the CoC can't prove they aren't, then they are in deep doo doo with the law.
Taking the CoC at their word isn't a legal standard, either.For some reason, that doesn't sound like the legal standard.
Yesterday, U.S. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) called on the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to investigate reports that foreign corporations may be funding efforts by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce to influence elections in this country. He pressed the commission to report its findings and to take any measures necessary to prohibit foreign influence of American elections.
Franken Calls for FEC Investigation into Chamber of Commerce Election Activities | Al Franken | Senator for Minnesota
News Corp.’s $1 million gift to the Republican Governors Association was the result of Rupert Murdoch’s personal friendship with former Fox News host and Ohio gubernatorial hopeful John Kasich, Murdoch told POLITICO Wednesday night.
Murdoch, who was in Washington to receive an award from The Media Institute, brushed aside concerns that the gift, which was unusually large and one-sided for a media company, might hurt Fox’s credibility as a news organization that reports on politics....
This gift, together with another $1 million News Corp. gift to the GOP-friendly U.S. Chamber of Commerce, has given Fox’s critics their strongest ammunition to date for arguing that the channel is not an objective observer, as it claims, but a player in the political process.
But the day the story of the Chamber donation broke, spokesmen from both Fox News and the News Corp. declined to comment.
Kasich inspired News Corp.?s RGA gift - On Media - POLITICO.com
It doesn't matter what the CoC says, the public has a right to know if a foreign company is buying influence in our elections and if the CoC can't prove they aren't, then they are in deep doo doo with the law.
Taking the CoC at their word isn't a legal standard, either.
Unholy Alliance of US Chamber and Foreign Money Could Destroy Democracy | ChattahBox News Blog
Man, the corporate money is flowing like water and our American democracy is getting sold right out from under us.
Oh, poor babies. Are you afraid the Union's Unholy Alliance with the Democratic Party has some competition now?
If this administration hadn't made such a mess of the country the last two yrs. the Dems would probably also be reaping the rewards of the SCOTUS ruling.
This COC thing sort of reminds me of the HC bill and taxpayer funded abortions. The dems insisted no tax payer money would be used because they would keep that money separate. Well the COC says the money contributed is different than the foreign money.
Taking the CoC at their word isn't a legal standard, either.
Oh, oh, Murdock's Newscorp is in deep doo doo, too.....
This goes beyond liberal and conservative. This is about people vs business, which is going to be a much more grave fight, as money couldn't care less about the people.
For the record, I would be just as against this even if the dems were the sole beneficiaries. Corruption is corruption and all of that money comes with strings attached.
interesting. do you feel the same way about Unions?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?