Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsMillhiser: The Supreme Court just made it much easier to bribe a member of Congress
Link to tweet
https://www.vox.com/2022/5/16/23074957/supreme-court-ted-cruz-fec-bribery-campaign-finance-first-amendment-john-roberts-elena-kagan
The Supreme Courts conservative majority has been at war with campaign finance laws for more than a dozen years, stretching at least as far back as its decision in Citizens United v. FEC (2010). On Monday, the Courts six Republican appointees escalated this war.
The Courts decision in FEC v. Ted Cruz for Senate is a boon to wealthy candidates. It strikes down an anti-bribery law that limited the amount of money candidates could raise after an election in order to repay loans they made to their own campaign.
Federal law permits candidates to loan money to their campaigns. In 2001, however, Congress prohibited campaigns from repaying more than $250,000 of these loans using funds raised after the election. They can repay as much as they want from campaign donations received before the election (although a federal regulation required them to do so within 20 days of the election).
The idea is that, if already-elected officials can solicit donations to repay what is effectively their own personal debt, lobbyists and others seeking to influence lawmakers can put money directly into the elected officials pocket and campaign donations that personally enrich a lawmaker are particularly likely to lead to corrupt bargains. Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) manufactured a case to try to overturn that $250,000 limit, and now, the Court has sided with him.
Indeed, now that this limit on loan repayments has been struck down, lawmakers with sufficiently creative accountants may be able to use such loans to give themselves a steady income stream from campaign donors.
*snip*
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 563 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Millhiser: The Supreme Court just made it much easier to bribe a member of Congress (Original Post)
Nevilledog
May 2022
OP
I cannot say with absolute certainty this is the most Corrupt Supreme Court in U.S. history...
msfiddlestix
May 2022
#3
Bettie
(16,126 posts)1. Maybe we (non-right wing humans) should organize a PAC
To buy ourselves a couple of republican senators.
I'm kidding, mostly, but FFS...
samsingh
(17,601 posts)2. i think the supreme court is completely corrupt now - like one of the
shithole third world countries
msfiddlestix
(7,286 posts)3. I cannot say with absolute certainty this is the most Corrupt Supreme Court in U.S. history...
But it certainly feels that way to me.
I think they need to hear from "we the people", whether they're in denial about it or not.
but I wonder how many citizens even know, or even care.
tears and deep sadness.