Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire 24.com network.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.


Republicans like campaign money ruling, Dems don't

03 April 2014, 12:59

Washington - The Supreme Court's latest ruling on campaign donations is likely to benefit both Republicans and Democrats and their candidates for Congress, who are now able to seek donations from deep-pocketed contributors able to give more without running afoul of the law.

The narrowly divided court on Wednesday voted 5-4 rejected a $123 200 ceiling on overall contributions to candidates, parties and political action committees over a two-year period.

But the impact of this ruling is limited because it does not undermine restrictions on contributions to individual candidates, now set at $2 600 per candidate, per election.

But Democrats say the ruling is more like a win for the wealthy, pointing out that it further erodes restrictions put in place to reduce the influence of big spenders on US politics. It follows a major 2010 case that lifted limits on independent spending by corporations and unions.   

Under that ruling, big donors have been able to work around the restrictions by going outside the campaign regulatory system and spending an unlimited amount of money on attack ads.

The court "has once again reminded Congress that Americans have a constitutional First Amendment right to speak and associate with political candidates and parties of their choice," Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky said on Wednesday after the court struck down a limit on the amount donors may give to candidates, party committees and political action committees combined.

He added that the court's ruling makes it clear that it is the "right of the individual, and not the prerogative of Congress, to determine how many candidates and parties to support".

No advantages

Yet two Senate Democrats told a news conference the ruling was another in a string of decisions by a conservative court majority that strengthens the ability of wealthy donors to have an impact on politics. "It advantages wealthy people over everybody else," Democratic Senator Chuck Schumer said.

Said Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse: "We see the Supreme Court behaving in a way that would be matched if the five conservative judges made it a strategy to go off and sit in a room by themselves and decide how best to implement the Republican agenda and then come out and did it."

The court's 5-4 ruling was a fresh declaration that many limits on big-money contributions violate the givers' free-speech rights, continuing a steady erosion of the restrictions under Chief Justice John Roberts.

The biggest of those rulings was the 2010 decision in the Citizens United case that lifted restrictions on independent spending by corporations and labour unions.

In particular, Wednesday's decision voided the overall federal limit on individuals' contributions - $123 200 in 2013 and 2014, broken down as $48 600 to all candidates combined and $74 600 to all party committees and political action committees in total.

Limitations on the amounts a donor may give an individual candidate or committee remain in effect.

Republicans and Democrats alike said that on its own, the decision does not inherently give either major political party an advantage.

Fred Malek, a veteran Republican fundraiser, said one likely effect would be to widen the number of competitive races, since donors will be free to spread their money more widely.

John Jordan, the CEO of a California winery and a wealthy Republican donor, said, "I'll bet you a lot of money it won't impact the dynamics of overall spending. Maybe you can write more $2 600 checks. But even if you wrote a check for every race that still isn't that big."

$48 600 limit

Wade Randlett, a California-based Democratic donor, said he didn't expect the ruling to have a great influence on "ideological" donors who only support members of one party.

But he said contributors seeking to influence specific legislation would now have an incentive to donate to a broad range of lawmakers on a specific committee or involved with a certain issue.

"You can give to anybody on both sides who has any relevance over your issue," he said.

Only 646 out of millions of donors in the election cycle of 2011-2012 gave the now-defunct legal maximum, according to the Centre for Responsive Politics.

The ruling will "mean there will be much greater emphasis by the campaigns and the parties on those donors with the biggest check books who can make those very large contributions," said Bob Biersack, who works for the Centre and is a 30-year veteran of the Federal Election Commission.

Cleta Mitchell, an election lawyer for Republicans, said the court's ruling means that various party committees and candidates no longer will have to vie for money from the same contributors.

The law permits a donor to contribute $5 200 for the primary and general election combined to any candidate, and if they gave the maximum, they could donate only to nine office-seekers before reaching the $48 600 limit to all federal office-seekers.

Parallel system

Similarly, while Republicans and Democrats in Washington each maintain a national party committee, a Senate campaign committee and a House campaign committee, a donor could give the maximum allowable amount to only two of the three without violating the overall limitation the court discarded.

Now, Mitchell said, "the donors get to choose obviously, but the committees don't have to feel like they're pinching another party's donors."

Ryan Call, a campaign finance attorney who is chairperson of the Colorado Republican Party, said the court's ruling will be a boon to state parties, which he said have been neglected previously because donors hit the overall spending limit before they could distribute funds lower on the political food chain.

"We have lots of optimism that this new decision would enable people who want to support us to do so," Call said.

Under the court's ruling, a donor could donate the maximum $10 000 a year to each of their party's 50 state committees, or a total of $1m during a two-year election cycle - and still donate to candidates as well as national party committees and political action committees.

The ruling does not affect a parallel system in which individuals donate unlimited amounts, sometimes undisclosed, to certain outside groups. Biersack said the same small group of 646 donors gave a total of about $93.4m in the last campaign.

Their largesse will still be avidly sought, as Republican presidential hopefuls recently demonstrated by travelling to Las Vegas to meet with casino magnate and conservative donor Sheldon Adelson.

- AP

Tags us

Read News24’s Comments Policy

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Read more from our Users

Nigeria @ 56: Words to my green f...

A leader’s job is not to dictate, but rather to be respected, admired and be a trustee, of the land we love, with so much potential, a land which should be freer than free. Its still a long way to fufilling our destiny! Read more...

Submitted by
Isaac Asabor263
Recession: An opportunity for Nig...

The recession should be seen as an opportunity for the country’s promotion as long as we all collectively conduct ourselves in a patriotic manner, writes Isaac Asabor.  Read more...

Submitted by
Black and White

We want to imitate the whites in everything because we are ignorant of our inherent originality and content. We spend all our Naira to acquire his inventions because we so oblivious of our natural endowments that we allow him have it for free. Read more...

Submitted by
Nate Nat
Adamawa State University Mubi: A ...

ADSU integrity forum has accused the Sunday Joshua Wugira, a lawyer, of adopting unorthodox tactics by abusing his privilege by attacking the integrity of ADSU Vice Chancellor Dr. Moses Zira Zaruwa, writes a News24 reader. Read more...

Submitted by
Abdulsalam Jubril
My Country Nigeria (Part One)

Poetry by Abdulsalam Jubril.

Submitted by
Abdulsalam Jubril
Recession, dearth in leadership a...

Every leader has the opportunity to become great and making himself immortal in the lives and hearts of people for generations to come. Will Mr. President seize this opportunity?, questions Abdulsalam Jubril. Read more...