Reason Magazine Article on Bequests to Political Parties

Reason has this interesting article on its web page about the Libertarian Party’s court battle with the Federal Election Commission, over whether limits on individual contributions should apply to bequests. The party received a surprise bequest in 2007 in excess of $200,000. The FEC refused to let the estate award the money to the party at once, and required the estate to hold back the money and release it slowly over the next seven years. Whether the FEC’s rules are too restrictive is a question pending in the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit.


Reason Magazine Article on Bequests to Political Parties — No Comments

  1. Hmmm…this raises an interesting question. What if a married corporate person were to stiff its spouse in its will and give half its estate to a political party and the other half to the church where it practiced one of its other first amendment rights?

    Hoo boy, it would be a hot time in corporate person probate court then, wouldn’t it?

  2. Corporations can’t donate to national committees of political parties, just as they can’t donate to candidates for federal office.

  3. Yep…just those “uncoordinated,” unlimited, unreported donations that don’t do candidates, or campaigns, or political parties one bit of good.

    Right, Richard? Wink wink…nod nod…

    Say…when you get a chance…send a hundred bucks to my wife, would you? I PROMISE if she spends it on booze and it ends up in my liquor cabinet, I won’t know it was your money that bought it. But PLEASE don’t send it directly to me, because I’m supposed to buy my own liquor without the help of blog editors.

  4. Hey look! I’ve suddenly got a hundred bucks to spend on pork chops instead of liquor!

    Gosh, I’m so lucky…so “uncoordinately” lucky!

  5. So, would you favor repealing the part of McCain-
    Feingold that restricts individual donations to political parties, so as to reduce the influence of these independent expenditure groups? I would.

  6. Since you support unlimited donations to Super PACs, your position is not particularly surprising, Richard.

    I’ve already stated in prior posts that I’m in favor of RADICAL campaign finance reform which would take us in the precisely the opposite direction that you endorse. MF was a Bandaid used to cover a gaping wound to democracy that requires a tourniquet for treatment.

    Just wondering…do you oppose the 1970 Public Health Cigarette Smoking ACT? We haven’t heard a peep for some 40 years from the tobacco company on that infringement of THEIR rights to free speech. Does restriction of speech intended to sell products and services somehow bother you less than speech intended to influence elections?

    But let’s get some real facts here for a more substantive discussion, shall we? Would you post a link to some source of information, whether public or private, to a detailed and complete listing of donations made to Super PAC’s, including donor names and amounts? I’m particularly interested in SP’s organized under 501C.

    Thanks in advance.

  7. Something I’ve been wanting to ask you for some time, Richard. i know you believe corporate “persons” have first amendment rights. What other rights do they have that other types of “persons” have? Do you think they should be allowed to obtain concealed carry permits, for example?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *