

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
Unknown donors and big-monied, outside groups are pouring record amounts of cash into key Senate races set to determine which political party will take control over the upper house come November's election, according to a new report published Tuesday by the Brennan Center for Justice.
The report, Election Spending 2014: 9 Toss-Up Senate Races (pdf), found that outside spending by undisclosed "dark money" groups is on track to "shatter previous records." According to newly-released data from the Federal Elections Commission, of the nine hotly-contested senate races this year--Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, and North Carolina--all but one is expected to beat the previous record for most outside money spent in a senate race, $52.4 million in Virginia in 2012.
The most expensive race in terms of overall spending, North Carolina at $64.8 million, is set to beat the record "several times over."
"[We]ak campaign finance laws and Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United have made possible new means of pumping money into elections while avoiding regulation or scrutiny," said report author Ian Vandewalker. "These tactics are gradually becoming the national norm, and give wealthy spenders more power than ever to buy influence over our political process and elected officials."
According to the nonpartisan law and policy center at the New York University School of Law, nonparty outside spending through September 30 amounts to $158.6 million in these nine most competitive races. "Outside groups have spent at a furious rate," the authors note, especially when compared with the $97 million spent on all 37 contests in the 2010 midterms.
While the biggest spender overall is a Democratic-aligned Super PAC, the Senate Majority PAC at $29,083,280, the report found that outside spending in favor of Republicans is much more likely to be dark money, which thus far make up 80 percent of nonparty outside expenditures.
Another election spending phenomena highlighted in the new report is the rise of dark money, single-candidate groups, which, according to the authors, is a notable development in an election year where the balance of power rests on a few key races.
According to the survey, "six of the eight highest-spending candidate-specific groups hide some or all of their donors, including the top candidate-specific spender overall." Further, many of those single-candidate groups depend on contributions from "double-dipping donors," who have already given up to their legal limit in direct contributions to the candidate's campaign.
Single-candidate groups also accept sizable contributions from corporations and unions, which are completely prohibited from giving directly to candidates, the report notes, adding that some of these groups "got all their revenue from these entities."
When handing down the Citizens United ruling, the Supreme Court "assumed that outside spending could not corrupt candidates because it comes from entities whose activity is independent of candidates' campaigns," the authors write. "The reality is that outside groups, some devoted to electing a single candidate, cooperate with candidates in many ways, potentially making their unlimited contributions as valuable to candidates as the direct contributions that are subject to strict caps."
The BCJ report comes on the heels of another report put forth by the Wesleyan Media Project which found that outside groups are disproportionately funding advertisements favoring GOP candidates in both congressional and gubernatorial races.
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
Unknown donors and big-monied, outside groups are pouring record amounts of cash into key Senate races set to determine which political party will take control over the upper house come November's election, according to a new report published Tuesday by the Brennan Center for Justice.
The report, Election Spending 2014: 9 Toss-Up Senate Races (pdf), found that outside spending by undisclosed "dark money" groups is on track to "shatter previous records." According to newly-released data from the Federal Elections Commission, of the nine hotly-contested senate races this year--Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, and North Carolina--all but one is expected to beat the previous record for most outside money spent in a senate race, $52.4 million in Virginia in 2012.
The most expensive race in terms of overall spending, North Carolina at $64.8 million, is set to beat the record "several times over."
"[We]ak campaign finance laws and Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United have made possible new means of pumping money into elections while avoiding regulation or scrutiny," said report author Ian Vandewalker. "These tactics are gradually becoming the national norm, and give wealthy spenders more power than ever to buy influence over our political process and elected officials."
According to the nonpartisan law and policy center at the New York University School of Law, nonparty outside spending through September 30 amounts to $158.6 million in these nine most competitive races. "Outside groups have spent at a furious rate," the authors note, especially when compared with the $97 million spent on all 37 contests in the 2010 midterms.
While the biggest spender overall is a Democratic-aligned Super PAC, the Senate Majority PAC at $29,083,280, the report found that outside spending in favor of Republicans is much more likely to be dark money, which thus far make up 80 percent of nonparty outside expenditures.
Another election spending phenomena highlighted in the new report is the rise of dark money, single-candidate groups, which, according to the authors, is a notable development in an election year where the balance of power rests on a few key races.
According to the survey, "six of the eight highest-spending candidate-specific groups hide some or all of their donors, including the top candidate-specific spender overall." Further, many of those single-candidate groups depend on contributions from "double-dipping donors," who have already given up to their legal limit in direct contributions to the candidate's campaign.
Single-candidate groups also accept sizable contributions from corporations and unions, which are completely prohibited from giving directly to candidates, the report notes, adding that some of these groups "got all their revenue from these entities."
When handing down the Citizens United ruling, the Supreme Court "assumed that outside spending could not corrupt candidates because it comes from entities whose activity is independent of candidates' campaigns," the authors write. "The reality is that outside groups, some devoted to electing a single candidate, cooperate with candidates in many ways, potentially making their unlimited contributions as valuable to candidates as the direct contributions that are subject to strict caps."
The BCJ report comes on the heels of another report put forth by the Wesleyan Media Project which found that outside groups are disproportionately funding advertisements favoring GOP candidates in both congressional and gubernatorial races.
Unknown donors and big-monied, outside groups are pouring record amounts of cash into key Senate races set to determine which political party will take control over the upper house come November's election, according to a new report published Tuesday by the Brennan Center for Justice.
The report, Election Spending 2014: 9 Toss-Up Senate Races (pdf), found that outside spending by undisclosed "dark money" groups is on track to "shatter previous records." According to newly-released data from the Federal Elections Commission, of the nine hotly-contested senate races this year--Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, and North Carolina--all but one is expected to beat the previous record for most outside money spent in a senate race, $52.4 million in Virginia in 2012.
The most expensive race in terms of overall spending, North Carolina at $64.8 million, is set to beat the record "several times over."
"[We]ak campaign finance laws and Supreme Court decisions like Citizens United have made possible new means of pumping money into elections while avoiding regulation or scrutiny," said report author Ian Vandewalker. "These tactics are gradually becoming the national norm, and give wealthy spenders more power than ever to buy influence over our political process and elected officials."
According to the nonpartisan law and policy center at the New York University School of Law, nonparty outside spending through September 30 amounts to $158.6 million in these nine most competitive races. "Outside groups have spent at a furious rate," the authors note, especially when compared with the $97 million spent on all 37 contests in the 2010 midterms.
While the biggest spender overall is a Democratic-aligned Super PAC, the Senate Majority PAC at $29,083,280, the report found that outside spending in favor of Republicans is much more likely to be dark money, which thus far make up 80 percent of nonparty outside expenditures.
Another election spending phenomena highlighted in the new report is the rise of dark money, single-candidate groups, which, according to the authors, is a notable development in an election year where the balance of power rests on a few key races.
According to the survey, "six of the eight highest-spending candidate-specific groups hide some or all of their donors, including the top candidate-specific spender overall." Further, many of those single-candidate groups depend on contributions from "double-dipping donors," who have already given up to their legal limit in direct contributions to the candidate's campaign.
Single-candidate groups also accept sizable contributions from corporations and unions, which are completely prohibited from giving directly to candidates, the report notes, adding that some of these groups "got all their revenue from these entities."
When handing down the Citizens United ruling, the Supreme Court "assumed that outside spending could not corrupt candidates because it comes from entities whose activity is independent of candidates' campaigns," the authors write. "The reality is that outside groups, some devoted to electing a single candidate, cooperate with candidates in many ways, potentially making their unlimited contributions as valuable to candidates as the direct contributions that are subject to strict caps."
The BCJ report comes on the heels of another report put forth by the Wesleyan Media Project which found that outside groups are disproportionately funding advertisements favoring GOP candidates in both congressional and gubernatorial races.