News & Comment
Blogs and Opinion
How Secret Foreign Money Could Infiltrate U.S. Elections by Andy Kroll, Mother Jones | August 8, 2012
Foreign money and American elections are like fire and water, orange juice and toothpaste, Yankees fans and Red Sox fans: The two don't mix. At least they haven't for nearly 50 years, when the federal government banned foreigners from giving or spending any money on local, state, and federal elections. But for the secretive nonprofit groups pumping hundreds of millions of dollars into the 2012 elections, the rules are different. These outfits, organized under the 501(c) section of the US tax code, can take money from foreign citizens, foreign labor unions, and foreign corporations, and they don't have to tell voters about it because they don't publicly disclose their donors. What's more, with a savvy attorney and a clean paper trail, a foreign donor could pump millions into a nonprofit without even the nonprofit knowing the money's true origin. read more »Republicans To IRS: Back Off Anonymous Money Groups by Sahil Kapur, tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com | August 7, 2012
A battle between leaders of the two parties over campaign finance rules intensified this week as Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) accused Republicans of flat-out threatening the Internal Revenue Service after they warned the agency not to tighten oversight of anonymous money groups misusing the tax code. The squabble is about how forcefully to crack down on groups approved under special 501(c)(4) tax status by claiming to primarily engage in “social welfare,” but which pour significant resources into political activities. Democrats want a strict cap on how much money they may spend for politics; Republicans prefer the ambiguity of the status quo. Beneath the issue is a sea of anonymous spending in which pro-GOP groups are drowning Democrats. read more »Billionaire Financed Wingnuttia Under The Radar by Digby , OurFuture.org | August 6, 2012
"I want to be invisible. I do guerrilla warfare. I paint my face and travel at night. You don't know it's over until you're in a body bag. You don't know until election night." --- Ralph Reed read more »Mitt Romney and the Anglo-Saxon Vote by Terrance Heath, OurFuture.org | July 26, 2012
Mitt Romney has either stumbled into or gotten himself into a bit of a "sticky wicket," during his visit to Great Britain. Not only has he managed to offend his hosts, but that Daily Telegraph article. The article, which appeared in one of the U.K.'s leading conservative papers, quoted an unnamed Romney adviser suggesting President Romney would restore the special relationship between the U.S. and U.K., based on a shared "Anglo-Saxon heritage." In remarks that may prompt accusations of racial insensitivity, one suggested that Mr Romney was better placed to understand the depth of ties between the two countries than Mr Obama, whose father was from Africa. “We are part of an Anglo-Saxon heritage, and he feels that the special relationship is special,” the adviser said of Mr Romney, adding: “The White House didn’t fully appreciate the shared history we have”. The Romney campaign has thus far limited its response to distancing itself from the quote and denying its veracity. Though it seems that such an offensive remark would require a much stronger response, the truth is Mitt Romney can't afford too much distance between himself and the ideas behind that quote. read more »Mitt Romney And The Anglo-Saxon Vote by Terrance Heath, OurFuture.org | July 25, 2012
The Romney campaign may caused a bit of controversy by touting Mitt's Anglo-Saxon credentials, but promising to take back White House for white folks helps the Romney in more ways than one. After all, Romney has a sizable birther constituency to placate and abet as much as he can get away with it. And suggesting that his Anglo-Saxon-ness is one of his qualifications for the presidency is bound to win him points with them, because signals that his definition of "American" is in line wth theirs. read more »The Cowardly Lions of ‘Free Speech’ by Bill Moyers, OurFuture.org | July 18, 2012
elcome. In all the hullabaloo over the Supreme Court's decision on health care, another of its rulings quickly fell off the public radar. Before deciding the fate of the Affordable Care Act, the Court announced it would not reconsider Citizens United. That's the odious 5-4 decision two years ago that opened our elections to unlimited contributions. Within minutes of that announcement, right-wing partisans were crowing about the advantage they now own. An advantage not due to ideas or personalities, but to the sheer force of money. They were remarkably candid and specific. Here's what Fred Barnes wrote in "The Weekly Standard" about the Senate race in Missouri: "For three weeks in May, Republican super-PACs took turns attacking Democratic senator Claire McCaskill in TV ads. Republicans hadn't held their primary-it's not until August 7-but McCaskill wound up trailing all three of the GOP candidates in polls. Now McCaskill, unnerved, is struggling to recover. "That's what super-PACs can do. When they emerged in 2010 and worked in tandem, they were a critical force in the Republican landslide in the congressional elections. This year they're playing an even bigger role. The size and reach of their efforts dwarf what they did two years ago." Attaboy, Fred, for telling it like it is. For exposing the hoax that the Court's original decision was about "free" speech. Free speech, my foot: It's about carpet bombing elections with all the tonnage your rich paymasters want to buy. Try not to laugh when you hear one of its perpetrators, the noted lawyer Floyd Abrams, say, as he did not too long ago, "I don't think we should want as a matter of policy to make decisions which are essentially, people can't do all the speaking that they can in a political campaign. I don't think we can ration speech." read more »Presto! The DISCLOSE Act Disappears by Bill Moyers, OurFuture.org | July 18, 2012
Ask any magician and they’ll tell you that the secret to a successful magic trick is misdirection — distracting the crowd so they don’t realize how they’re being fooled. Get them watching your left hand while your right hand palms the silver dollar: “Now you see it, now you don’t.” The purloined coin now belongs to the magician. Just like democracy. Once upon a time conservatives supported the full disclosure of campaign contributors. Now they oppose it with their might — and magic, especially when it comes to unlimited cash from corporations. My goodness, they say, with a semantic wave of the wand, what’s the big deal?: nary a single Fortune 500 company had given a dime to the super PACs. (Even that’s not entirely true, by the way.) Meanwhile the other hand is poking around for loopholes, stuffing millions of secret corporate dollars into non-profit, tax-exempt organizations called 501(c)s that funnel the money into advertising on behalf of candidates or causes. Legally, in part because the Federal Election Commission does not consider them political committees, they can keep it all nice and anonymous, never revealing who’s really behind the donations or the political ads they buy. This is especially handy for corporations — why risk offending customers by revealing your politics or letting them know how much you’re willing to shell out for a permanent piece of an obliging politician? That’s why passing a piece of legislation called the DISCLOSE Act is so important and that’s why on Monday, Republicans in the Senate killed it. Again. read more »The Supreme Court Overreach Nobody Is Talking About by Rep. Raul Grijalva and Rep. Keith Ellison , thehill.com | June 27, 2012
One hundred years ago, the people of Montana raised their voices and voted to close the door on corporate money in politics. On Monday, without even hearing arguments, the Supreme Court kicked the door open, allowing corporate dollars to flood the Treasure State's elections. Lost between the rulings on Arizona’s immigration law and the Affordable Care Act is the most dangerous threat to our democratic process since the Citizens United v. FEC case of 2010 – and few people seem to have noticed. In throwing out Montana’s hundred-year-old state law forbidding corporate political contributions, the Court ignored the will of 75 percent of the American people and overturned an effective state precedent that protected Montana elections from the corruption of corporate money. This ruling compounds the damage to our democracy already done by the Citizens United decision, which has allowed millions of untraceable dollars to overwhelm our federal, state, and local elections. read more »The People's Indictment of Karl Rove by Terrance Heath, OurFuture.org | June 22, 2012
On June 20, 2012, Nick Nyhart, CEO and President of Public Campaign, Joan Mandle, Executive Director of Democracy Matters, Tracy Leatherberry of Common Cause and others delivered a people's indictment for crimes against our democracy to Karl Rove, American Crossroads, and Crossroads GPS. Detailing an attempt to subvert and sell our democracy, the indictment was also mic check'd from the street by hundreds of protesters in 100 degree DC heat. The protest was organized by the Campaign for America's Future, OurDC and others who took to the street. read more »Super PACs and Secret Money Destroying America's Democracy by Jim Hightower, creators.com | June 20, 2012
Leave it to Bill Moyers, one of America's most useful citizens, to sum up our country's present political plight in a succinct metaphor: "Our elections have replaced horse racing as the sport of kings. These kings are multimillionaire corporate moguls who by divine right — not of God, but (of the Supreme Court's) Citizens United decision — are now buying politicians like so much pricey horseflesh." Pricey, indeed. In its disgraceful, democracy-crushing judicial edict of January 2010, the Court took the big advantage that America's corporate elite already had in politics — and super-sized it. This is the first presidential election to be run under the rigged rules invented by the Court's five-man corporatist majority, and we can see the effects of this ruling. read more »
The Latest
Corporations Hide Election Spending From the Public Eye, The Nation | October 19, 2010
To avoid angering the public and their investors, some corporate interests are going to great lengths to hide their political spending. These companies have dumped money into nonprofits and trade associations that often have innocuous names like Americans for Job Security or Revere America, but in reality serve to shield donors from accountability for their spending in our elections. read more »
Joe Manchin's oddly inspiring debate performance, salon.com | October 19, 2010
Man, did John Raese lay it on thick Monday night. read more »
Senators Who Opposed Tobacco Bill Got Top Dollar From Industry, mcclatchydc.com | June 12, 2009
Among the 17 senators who voted against allowing the Food and Drug Administration to regulate tobacco are some of the top recipients of campaign contributions from the tobacco industry, which has donated millions of dollars to lawmakers in the past several campaign cycles. read more »
Recession Adds To Hurdles Facing U.S. Census, npr.org | March 25, 2009
A year from now, the U.S. will conduct its decennial population count. The findings are used to re-apportion congressional districts, disburse federal funding — even decide where new traffic lights go. But the economic crisis threatens to make this daunting task even harder. There is special concern about minority groups, which are traditionally hard to count.
Political Fight Brewing on Census, Associated Press | February 12, 2009
There's still a year before Americans start filling out their census forms. But even before President Barack Obama has named a new director for the U.S. Census Bureau, Republicans and Democrats on Capitol Hill have begun bickering about how that person will carry out the once-a-decade job of cataloging the country's population. read more »
Obama Sworn in as 44th President, The Washington Post | January 21, 2009
Barack Obama took the oath of office today as the 44th president of the United States and pledged to "begin again the work of remaking America." Addressing a huge throng estimated at nearly 2 million people on the capital's Mall and millions of others watching on television, Obama somberly recognized the multiple crises now afflicting the nation at a time of war abroad and economic turmoil at home read more »
Obama Justice Picks Break with Bush Path, iht.com | January 6, 2009
President-elect Barack Obama has tapped four Clinton administration lawyers, whose records signal a sharp break from the legal policies of the last eight years, to fill four top Justice Department posts. read more »
Democratic Congress Convenes, uk.reuters.com | January 6, 2009
The new U.S. Congress convenes on under pressure to deal with a worsening economy by passing a stimulus package that Barack Obama could sign into law soon after being sworn in as president. "We are in a very difficult spot," Obama told reporters between meetings with congressional leaders on Capitol Hill. read more »
Obama Pledges to Work With Governors, CNN | December 3, 2008
Plagued by rising unemployment, falling tax revenue and increased demand for state services, the nation's governors met with President-elect Barack Obama and Vice President-elect Joe Biden to press for federal money to ease their fiscal strain. read more »
Blacks Face Voting Obstacles, The Guardian | October 31, 2008
While formal poll taxes were declared illegal in 1965 with the passage of the Voting Rights Act, versions of it remain in place — for instance, in the cost of taking time off work, travelling to the polls, or obtaining identification. African American votes are now discounted by many other means, as well. read more »
