Top 10 donors make up a third of donations to super PACs

[Bill USA]

http://www.iwatchnews.org/2012/04/26/8753/top-10-donors-make-third-donations-super-pacs

[font size="3"]Four billionaires among biggest contributors[/font]





Contrary to expectations, the much-criticized court decisions that gave us “super PACs” have not led to a tsunami of contributions flowing from the treasuries of Fortune 500 corporations — at least not yet anyway.

What the Citizens United decision and a lower court ruling have done is make household names out of a bunch of relatively unknown, very wealthy conservatives. Of the top 10 donors to super PACs so far in the 2012 election cycle, seven are individuals — not corporations — and four of those individuals are billionaires.

The top 10 contributors gave more than a third, or $68 million of the nearly $202 million reported by the outside spending groups this election, according to a Center for Public Integrity analysis of Federal Election Commission records.

Rounding out the top 10 are two labor unions and a physicians’ medical malpractice insurance group.

<more>

[PA Democrat]

1. All are right wing except for the NEA and the AFL-CIO

which came in 4th and 8th place respectively. No wonder the right wingers hate unions so much.

[Frustratedlady]

2. The Kochs aren't included?

Or do they own their own PAC/evil group?

[Bill USA]

3. I think the key here is these are the largest funders that we know about. Koch brothers have funded

501-c.4s so no one except the brothers Koch ( and the groups they've contributed to and close fellow Nazis) know how much they've contributed.

There is a case in court to reveal the secret funders of 501(c.4) secret PACs.

Koch Brothers, Chamber of Commerce Face Possible Campaign Donation Disclosure After Ruling

WASHINGTON -- On Friday evening, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a ruling that could begin the process of revealing the identities of secret donors to groups connected to Karl Rove and the Koch brothers.

The court ruled in Van Hollen v. Federal Election Commission that the FEC rules that restricted campaign donor disclosure are not valid and must be changed to provide for disclosure.

"We are very happy to see the judge got it right," says Paul Ryan, a lawyer for the Campaign Legal Center, a campaign finance watchdog that was a part of the team challenging the FEC rules.

Those rules state that donors to groups spending money on "electioneering communications," or advertisements that do not specifically call to elect or defeat a candidate, must only be disclosed if they specifically earmarked their donation to that particular expenditure. Since few, if any, donors to these groups ever earmark their donation for a specific election expense there was no disclosure.

NOte that 501(c.4)s are not supposed to be engaged in political activity to the extent that they become their "primary purpose".



http://www.opensecrets.org/527s/types.php
<emphasis my own_Bill USA>

Types of Advocacy Groups

501(c) Groups — Nonprofit, tax-exempt groups organized under section 501(c) of the Internal Revenue Code that can engage in varying amounts of political activity, depending on the type of group. For example, 501(c)(3) groups operate for religious, charitable, scientific or educational purposes. These groups are not supposed to engage in any political activities, though some voter registration activities are permitted. 501(c)(4) groups are commonly called "social welfare" organizations that may engage in political activities, as long as these activities do not become their primary purpose. Similar restrictions apply to Section 501(c)(5) labor and agricultural groups, and to Section 501(c)(6) business leagues, chambers of commerce, real estate boards and boards of trade.

Here's an article that goes into Chris van Hollen's suit of the Federal Elections Commission over the disclosure loop-hole they created.