The Federal Election Commission has filed this 23-page brief in defense of the federal campaign finance law that prevents the Libertarian Party from receiving its $235,575 bequest from Joseph Shaber all in one lump-sum, and using that money for ballot access petitioning. Before December 2014, federal law did not permit individuals to give more than $33,400 in any one calendar year to a political party, and the law even applies to bequests left to the party. The federal law says the money in the bequest must be handed over to a party piece-meal, year after year, instead of all at once.
In December 2014 Congress changed the limits on donations to political parties, so that individuals can give $100,200 per year to a party for its legal expenses, and another $100,200 for the party’s national convention expenses, and yet another $100,200 per year for headquarters expenses. The FEC brief says that the party should not complain about the restriction on receiving its bequest and using it for general purposes (including ballot access), because the party is free to accept all the money now if it puts the money in its specialized bank accounts for legal bills, national convention expenses, and expenses relating to its headquarters building.
In effect, the FEC is saying that deceased individuals cannot be allowed to give large donations to a political party, and let the party use it for expenses related to campaign expenses (including ballot access), because that would cause “corruption”. But the FEC is saying it is all right to let wealthy individuals (living or dead) donate up to $300,600 to a party for certain kinds of expenses because that does not cause “corruption.”
The FEC brief also says that the party has no right to complain about ballot access expenses, because if the party had real support, it would always poll enough votes to remain on the ballot and wouldn’t need to spend money on petitions. This point ignores the fact that some states have unreasonably repressive tests for a party to remain on the ballot. The Pennsylvania retention law, that a group must have 15% registration membership, is so severe that if that were the law in Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and the District of Columbia, the Republican Party would not be automatically on the ballot in those places. Similar, if the Pennsylvania law were in force in Utah and Idaho, the Democratic Party would not be on the ballot in those two states.
I’ve been actively involved in politics for 10 years now. When I started, I had a naive view that the law was fair, that it was fairly administered, and that the legal system was honorable (i.e. the courts, the Department of Justice and state AGs). Ten years later I’ve sadly come to the conclusion that US elections are just as dishonest as the pretend elections of banana republics and dictatorships. The system implements the corruption through ballot access laws, campaign contribution laws, speech control laws (FEC media regulations) and, when necessary, outright fraud. The fact that the arbiters of our legal system speak in tongues (legalese) and dress in black robes no longer fools me – these Americans are akin to the Nazi guards at Auschwitz – they just follow orders, doing the bidding of our owners, so as to keep us sheep from revolting.