On November 4, the National Republican Senatorial Committee filed a federal lawsuit to overturn the federal campaign law that limits how much money parties can contribute to their nominees. Parties can already contribute an unlimited amount if the money is not coordinated with the candidate’s campaign, but there are limits if the party coordinates with the candidate.
The case is filed in Ohio. National Republican Senatorial Committee v FEC, 1:22cv-639. In order for this lawsuit to win, it will be necessary to persuade the courts that the U.S. Supreme Court was wrong when it upheld limits in 2001 in FEC v Colorado Republican Federal Campaign Committee. That was a 5-4 decision. It is likely that the Republican Party will lose this lawsuit in the lower federal courts, and that the U.S. Supreme Court will then hear the case. Scholars generally deplore the status quo, in which political parties have fewer rights to contribute money than virtually any other non-corporate groups. Thanks to the Institute for Free Speech for this news.
The case is assigned to U.S. District Court Judge Douglas R. Cole, a Trump appointee. J.D. Vance is a co-plaintiff, along with Steven Chabot.
Contribution caps for both candidates and committees ought to be entirely removed. They only encourage the formation of numerous conduits to bypass the limits. It would be better if contributors were encouraged to report their total contributions to particular candidates totally, and up front.
NO $ amount in A1.
There, I beat az
So, just let major parties/people do whatever the heck the want?
Even if this lawsuit wins, there would still be controls on how much money an individual can give to a national committee of a political party.
“So, just let major parties/people do whatever the heck the want?”
IMO, yes, just as long as they report it up front. Let the voters decide if their contributions are a problem.
In fact, i would even go so far as allowing corporations to make direct contributions, as long as they reported it up front.
You can argue all you want about whether corporations are “real” persons; there is no doubt that the taxes that they pay are quite real. No taxation without representation.
IMO, because corporations pay taxes, they are entitled to a political voice. Citizens United was a move in the right direction.
CONGRATS TO WZ ON BEING EDUCATED.
TROLLS/CONLAW MORONS ARE TRIPLE EEE— HOPELESS.
ARTIFICIAL PERSONS, PRIVATE OR PUBLIC, AINT HUMAN
— THUS HAVE VERY LIMITED POWERS.
Sorry, I meant to post this here in reply to WZ:
https://ballot-access.org/2022/11/29/georgia-now-has-a-group-working-for-traditional-ranked-choice-voting/#comment-1130232
And this:
https://ballot-access.org/2022/11/29/georgia-now-has-a-group-working-for-traditional-ranked-choice-voting/#comment-1130233