Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
- In Arkansas, Exxon Is Threatening to Arrest Reporters But Otherwise Telling Nobody Nothing
- It’s Official: A Democratic President Proposes to Cut Social Security
- Exxon's Unfriendly Skies: Why Does Exxon Control the No-Fly Zone Over Arkansas Tar Sands Spill?
- The Corporate Betrayal of America
- Why Would Anyone Celebrate the Death of Margaret Thatcher? Ask a Chilean
- The Corporate Betrayal of America
- The Elephant in the Room: Militarism
- Why Would Anyone Celebrate the Death of Margaret Thatcher? Ask a Chilean
- Global Wealth Inequality - What You Never Knew You Never Knew
- Exxon's Unfriendly Skies: Why Does Exxon Control the No-Fly Zone Over Arkansas Tar Sands Spill?
Popular content
Today's Top News
The Buying of the President 2012: Meet the Super-PAC Mega-Donors
The more we learn about Super PACs, the uglier the picture gets.
A new analysis by USA Today found that just five super-wealthy individuals have contributed 25 percent of the money raised by Super PACs since the beginning of 2011. The New York Times added that “two dozen individuals, couples or corporations have given $1 million or more to Republican super PACs this year…. Collectively, their contributions have totaled more than $50 million this cycle, making them easily the most influential and powerful political donors in politics today.”
The hierarchy is topped by Texas businessman Harold Simmons, a major funder of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004, who has donated nearly $15 million to three different GOP candidates (Perry, Gingrich and Romney) and the Karl Rove–founded American Crossroads. He’s followed by Las Vegas casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, who’s given $10 million to Gingrich’s Super PAC and says he may give an additional "$10 or $100 million to Gingrich” before the primary season is over. “Take away Sheldon Adelson and the pro-Gingrich ‘Winning Our Future’ PAC is just a federally registered lemonade stand,” Stephen Colbert joked.
While Gingrich is wholly dependent on Adelson, Rick Santorum’s Super PAC raised the bulk of its money in January from just two individuals, Wyoming billionaire Foster Freiss and Louisiana energy executive William Dore. Even insurgent candidates must be propped up by billionaires nowadays to stay competitive. In contrast, the Super PAC of erstwhile front-runner Mitt Romney raised $5 million last month from twenty-five donors. That’s a diversified portfolio compared to Santorum and Gingrich. Virtually all of the money contributed to these Super PACs came from $25,000 checks or higher. The Super-PAC era gives a whole new meaning to the phrase “the buying of the president."
A recent report from Demos and US PIRG found that 196 people have contributed nearly 80 percent of the individual donations to Super PACs in 2010 and 2011 by giving $100,000 or more each, for a total of $79 million. That’s 43 percent of the $181 million total raised by Super PACs during this period (the rest comes from businesses, unions and other PACs). Demos and US PIRG provided me with the names of these donors and which Super PACs they gave money to. Click here to see the document (pdf). They are the .000063 percent of the electorate who will shape the 2012 campaign on both sides of the aisle.
“I’m against very wealthy people attempting to or influencing elections,” Adelson told Forbes this week. “But as long as it’s doable, I’m going to do it.” That’s the best argument yet for overturning the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
18 Comments so far
Show AllAh yes. Dem damned Repugs. Not one mention of dem damned Dems' money. While they are behind in the SuperPac race for now, they get plenty from Wall Street, etc. and elsewhere.
The thing is: you can buy a Dem so much more cheaply than a Repug. Sorta the difference between a Hummer and a GMC. Both polluting gas guzzlers.
Quoting the USA Today and the New York Times. This is what passes for progressive "investigative journalism" among the US "left."
If I go on a Nation cruise can I talk to this tripesmith in person?
"tj"
I have long believed that going on a cruise is merely proof that a person wants to lose touch with reality.
That there is a "Nation" cruise just about sums it all up.
Oh contraire mon ami, get with it!
You get to rub shoulders with the finest (well-paid) "progressives" and "liberals" in the US and get to go to cocktail parties with them (unless you're puking over the starboard rail due to the guilded hypocricy of it all).
And they look you in the eyes so intently and sincerely nod (while signing you up for subscriptions to their websites); and maybe, just maybe, even flirt with you.
What can be more erotic than batting eyes with a bloodless liberal while sipping cheap white wine and over-priced hors d'oeurves?
I mean, why bother with reality when you can buy a "progressive/left" reality cruise/show. If that aint nirvanna, BbA, what the hell is?
White House for sale! Yeah that's about it.
Turn off your TV. Turn off your TV. Turn off your TV.
....Post-Constitutional America
Poor Ari Berman.
He can't quite find his way to the whole story.
If he wasn't wearing the back half of that jackass costume, he might be able to stand up straight and see beyond the ass in front of him on which he is clinging.
Birdbrain Alley...
Before this essay falls off the thread rotation completely, allow me to compliment you on your excellent comment.
Your erudition -- graphic, biting, deadly accurate, and hilarious -- filled me with writer's envy.
I loved it.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
When I think about where this money could go and how it could help the non profit organizations trying desperately to help those falling between the cracks, it makes me sick. I hate our political system. I know there are diehards on both sides of the isle who claim we must work within this structure as it is, that it's been this way for hundreds of years. I say "no more". It's obviously not working. And these obscene amounts of money poured into one candidate who offer nothing but the same old, same old is disgusting. It's time to do things differently. I'm staying home during this year's presidential election and my wallet is reserved for the organizations helping the people and animals who have actually fallen into the cracks .
The office of the US President has ALWAYS been for sale to the highest bidder.
Some choices we have. All candidates are corporate toadies. This is more like being given the choice between lethal injection and hanging than a democracy.
Let us be honest here, America is the bastion of capitalism. Capitalism is based on greed, money and power. Since the last ruling of the Supreme Court the dogs have been unleashed. Every President who has ever run this country was bought and paid for. So are all our politicians, Country Level, State Level and Capitol Hill.
Our Electoral system has been corrupted by money for decades, but now that these rich power brokers have no laws limiting the amount of money they can contribute to candidates, as a result we are now cursed with the SuperPacs and the complete corruption of our Electoral System.
Is there a solution to this? No. This is what true capitalism is all about, folks will have to learn to deal with it. No money, no power. This corruption spawned ALEC and more of it is coming, it does not matter if there is a Republican or Democratic President, they have to do what they are told, rich corporations in this country own them and own America.
The Author:
The Buying of the President 2012: This reads like Mainstream Media, Should this not read "The Buying of the Presidency 2012"? I say this backdoor action is another example of racism.
Willful Omission or Selective Amnesia?
Ari Berman serves up quite a litany of Evil GOPers and the Super PAC villains who fund them and laments: "The Super-PAC era gives a whole new meaning to the phrase “the buying of the president."
Evidently, Berman has never heard of Barack Obama, who refused to accept public funding for his presidential race in 2008, and who denounced Super PACs as a "threat to our democracy." Strong and principled words indeed!
Alas, that was before Obama recently decided to embrace the "threat to our democracy" with a Super PAC of his very own, and his campaign staff urged his wealthy donors and supporters to stuff his Super PAC with lots of cash.
Obama was already hauling in huge contributions from private play-to-play fundraisers at $38,500 per person while employing the standard methods for raising money from small donors, but he still couldn't bring himself to just say, "No" to Super PACs.
Clearly, principles seem to be the first to go in the Obama administration when it is not politically convenient. Consequently, they have not only lost credibility -- they have lost a potent campaign issue, i.e., the notion that Obama is different from the GOPers. He could have run on the corrupting influence of corporate money on our political process, but chose instead to abandon his former principled stand in favor of the cash.
Finally, on Election Day 2012, we are left with dumbed-down tribal loyalties to political party, the cult of personality between the Democrat and the GOPer, and the dueling millionaires and billionaires who fund the Super PACs that support them.
Was Ari Berman's latest screed an effort at "herding donkeys" to support Obama and the Democrats? That's going to be a very tough sell.
PS -- The Lesser Evil fear tactic is a Dead Donkey.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"PS -- The Lesser Evil fear tactic is a Dead Donkey."
_____________________
Perhaps. But if so, there are an appalling number of progressive liberal-lite maggots thriving on its corpse.
They'll be buzzing around in both the articles and comments in increasing swarms in the months to come.
For sale, one slightly used country.
If voters cast informed votes, none of this would matter. The idea that voters can be so easily influenced by TV political ads is insulting to voters - but very true.
Don't blame the PACs. Blame the voters who are too busy, or too lazy, to do their homework.
Never vote for an incumbent.
Never vote for a D or R.
Join the W.I.N. campaign. Write in NADER.
No names for the democrat pac donations? Why is that? Are the republicans being more transparent about the whole pac thing?
gardenernorcal
Ari Berman is busy "herding donkeys" and fighting to "rebuild" the corrupt and hopeless Democratic Party and wants to distract us with the Evil GOPers and their Evil Super PACS. So, be afraid. Be very afraid!
Actually, the GOPers are being more transparent about their Super PACs -- bragging about them as if the tens of millions of dollars they collect from their billionaire sugar daddies are commensurate with penis size -- and no one should be surprised.
Plus, Berman wants to avoid confronting the fact that the Democrats really are sneaky bastards.
PS -- Obama has a Super PAC, too, but it's a Good Super PAC -- not like those Evil GOPer Super PACS. Now, don't you feel reassured?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~