Friday, October 11, 2013

Loose Cannon or Loose Screw: Certainly Pro Big Money

USSC Associate Justice Scalia: Big Money Protector or Court Jester


The headlines got my attention since I have battled this issue for decades:  The Shady Trick Justice Scalia Plans to Use to Inject Even More Big Money into Elections

And, now my if and it’s a mighty big if is simple, pretty much as this article states: If the Supreme Court gives the GOP what it is asking for in the case of McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (FEC).  Shaun McCutcheon is a businessman and also a plaintiff in the case, along with the RNC. The basic question is whether two limits on how much money wealthy individuals can give to parties and candidates will survive contact with the conservative Chief Justice John Roberts Court.

Current law limits the amount rich donors can give to individual candidates (currently, $2,600) as well as the amount that they can give to party organizations. Additionally, the law also limits how much the wealthy can give altogether to all candidates and to all party groups.

Presently, these limits are $48,600 to candidates and $74,600 to PACs and party committees — for a total cap of $123,200. McCutcheon and the RNC challenge these final two caps. So they want people who have already given more than a hundred thousand dollars to Republican candidates and to GOP groups to be allowed to donate even more. 

Summary: If the Court goes 5-4 (Citizens United, Part II) then this money laundering scheme will almost certainly be legal.  

Imagine the fallout. So, who wins and who loses? Big money and the American public.

No comments: