"Complacent or over powered"
Complacent AND over-powered AND ignorant.
News Flash: There is no solution. The VRWC has won the war, and are now mopping up by going after property taxes (privatizing public schools to union-less for-profit scam schools), all public utilities, and will continue to target SS for privatization.
updated: 501(c)4s are leaving super PACs in the shade.
http://www.propublica.org/article/ho...public-welfareForget super PACs, their much-hyped cousins, which can take unlimited contributions but must name their donors. More money is being spent on TV advertising in the presidential race by social welfare nonprofits, known as 501(c)(4)s for their section of the tax code, than by any other type of independent group.
As of Aug. 8, they had spent more than $71 million on ads mentioning a candidate for president, according to estimates by Kantar Media's Campaign Media Analysis Group, or CMAG. Super PACs have spent an estimated $56 million.
Congress created the legal framework for 501(c)(4) nonprofits nearly a century ago. To receive the tax exemption, groups were supposed to be "operated exclusively for the promotion of social welfare." The IRS later opened the door to some forms of political activity by interpreting the statute to mean groups had to be "primarily" engaged in enhancing social welfare. But neither the tax code nor regulators set out how this would be measured.
"The tax laws are being ripped off and the public is being denied information to which they are en led — namely, who is financing ads that are being run to influence their votes," said Fred Wertheimer, the president of Democracy 21, a watchdog group that has filed repeated complaints about 501(c)(4)s to regulators.
Seems the chances of that getting passed are slim to none right now, but at least they're making an effort.
America is ed and un able.
"amendment to the Cons ution"
go ahead and laugh at people power. it suits you and your lazy nihilism.
go ahead and think that the 1%, VRWC, UCA, financial sector don't own and operate the country for their protection and enrichment.
Get back to me when you have ANY DATA to the contrary.
so now anonymous shadow groups can fund elections and influence their outcomes... nice!
have for quite some time now...not that people pay it much heed, except for briefly, once every two to four years.
Now? This has been going on for decades, B.... the Fed, banksters, special interests, and defense contractors have an outsized influence on our elections and the actions of our elected officials, tbh..... and it happens on both sides of the aisle, not just one....
"This has been going on for decades"
Not at this volume of black cash into absolute fraud like "social welfare" PACs, and $100Ms of secret money flows. C-U totally transforms the situation for the worse, thank you Repug extreme activist JINO SCOTUS.
Corporate-Americans $Bs is protected 1st Amendment free speech, but they can speak in 100% secrecy.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-22-2012 at 12:19 PM.
scary stuff
And beneficial to both established political parties, as well as their faceless, rich, and powerful string pullers
And Wino, dude, your OP's are almost always read by this poster, if not always responded to
thx, man
The Illuminati!
It is time to be very nihilistic, imo.
The SCOTUS has said it is legal for untold millions to be contributed by unnamed donors to whatever 'educational' 501c(4) political 'issues' boards in each and every election we have. That means that we, the people, have lost our 'one man, one vote' position.
There is nothing in this world that we can do about it, is there?
Who do you think China will support?
I'll bet Obama since he wants to give our nation away.
http://reporting.sunlightfoundation....ops-2010-tota/This cycle's outside spending mostly comes in the form of "independent expenditures" supporting or opposing political candidates by unions, corporations, trade associations, non-profit groups and super PACs. This money enabled outside groups to run shadow campaigns for or against candidates of their choice, as a look at some of the expenditures reported over the weekend shows. They include:$117,880 from Planned Parenthood for a mailer against Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney, $5,000 from the Natural Resources Defense Council for plane flyover message against Heather Wilson, the Republican Senate candidate in New Mexico, and $1,735 for a TV ad opposing Sen. Jon Tester, D-Montana, underwritten by a group called America Is Not Stupid, Inc.
But it also includes $4.1 million in expenditures for "electioneering," the term used for ads and political activities that focus on issues and policies in ways that not-so-subtly encourage voters to support or oppose a particular candidate.
About 78 percent of this year's outside spending can be attributed to the Citizens United effect:
- $272 million from super PACs, en ies that came into being only following the Supreme Court's January 2010 decision, and
- almost $93 million from corporations, trade associations and non-profits -- groups that the Supreme Court ruling allowed to spend in unlimited amounts and that, because of their tax status, are not required to disclose the source of their funds to the Federal Election Commission.
The $365 million those groups have pumped into the campaign so far is almost double their contribution in 2010, according to Sunlight's calculations.
A deeper dive into the data shows that the latest uptick in outside spending is focused on congressional races: Even in presidential battleground states, almost all the spending by outside groups is focused on House and Senate candidates. The groups providing the cash run the gamut of outside spending organizations and have widely different strategies
http://reporting.sunlightfoundation....y-242-million/King of fundraising: Obama leads Romney by $242 million
By Bill Allison Sep 21 2012 2:33 p.m.
While the most recent Gallup poll shows registered voters equally split, at 47 percent a piece, in the money race President Barack Obama has an unassailable lead.
In the 2012 campaign cycle, Obama's campaign, the Democratic National Committee and two joint fundraising committees supporting them have collectively raised $743.5 million. The campaign of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, his joint fundraising committee and the Republican National Committee have raised $500.6 million. Because the joint fundraising committee, Romney Victory Inc., files quarterly, its total had to be estimated from media accounts of the campaign's August fundraising totals.
The fundraising dominance of the Obama campaign paid off In August, when his campaign reported spending $66.2 million on media buys, consulting and production--nearly five times as much as the $18 million spent by his opponent, former Masachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, on getting his message out.
Heading into the election's final weeks, Romney, the RNC and an estimated total for Romney's joint fundraising committee show the Republicans lead in cash on hand, with $165 million vs. $125 million for Obama, the DNC and the joint committees, Obama Victory Fund 2012 and the Swing State Victory Fund. However, the New York Times reported that much of the money Romney raised for the RNC over the summer is earmarked, not for his own campaign, but for congressional campaigns and state party committees.
Comparing just the Romney and Obama campaign committees, the President again has the advantage, with $38.3 million more in the bank than the Romney campaign, which also reported debts of $15 million after taking out a $20 million loan in August.
VRWC/1%er/UCA advantage goes to Obama.
lol gfy
with gusto!
multiple super PACS stand behind a number of primary contenders on the GOP side. could be another bruising fight between candidates who have little chance in the general election.
http://www.texastribune.org/2015/07/...pac-2016-race/
Clinton On Track To Raise $45 Million In First Quarter
Hillary Rodham Clinton is on track to raise a record $45 million in contributions during her first quarter as a 2016 presidential candidate, building a formidable campaign fund that further solidifies her position as the prohibitive Democratic front-runner, according to numbers released by her campaign Wednesday morning.
In a sign of the growing dominance of money in politics, the staggering amount of cash far exceeds what Clinton raised during her first quarter as a candidate eight years ago, when officials from her campaign reported they were ecstatic with her $26 million haul. It also dwarfs the amount her next-closest rival, Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, is likely to raise.
The fundraising quarter that ended Tuesday is traditionally used as a barometer to gauge the strength of campaigns. Clinton officials boasted that they bested the previous record for a first-quarter candidate, which was set by President Barack Obama in 2011 as he embarked on his re-election campaign. Obama raised $41.9 million during that period.
But the large bank account by no means clears the field for Clinton.
Sanders, who has not yet released his fundraising figures, has enough in the bank to mount a compe ive challenge in at least the early states. Earlier in the quarter, he had already raised $8 million from more than 200,000 donors. At this stage in the campaign, the number of donors can be as important as the total amount raised, as it reflects grass-roots support and enthusiasm.
The Clinton campaign did not reveal how many people contributed in a background memo sent to reporters. But it noted that 91 percent of the contributions were $100 or less. In the final days of the quarter, the campaign had blitzed supporters with emails, imploring them to give as little as $1 — a clear sign of Clinton’s eagerness to show broad-based interest. The pitches set a goal of 50,000 contributions.
Campaign officials have said they need $100 million to win the primary. They are clearly well on their way. Should Clinton win, however, she will need to ramp up her fundraising substantially. A successful general election campaign fund would likely exceed $1 billion.
Much of that money won’t be directed to the official campaign account, which cannot accept contributions exceeding $2,700 per donor. The funds will be sent to Clinton’s super PAC, which evades federal fundraising rules by operating independent of the campaign. Donors are free to give unlimited amounts to that fund.
http://www.nationalmemo.com/clinton-...first-quarter/
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
