Published: Thursday, January 19, 2012
In our view / Super PACs
Require some accountability
Nightly watchers of the Comedy Central cable channel are probably better educated than most Americans regarding federal election law. That's thanks to the faux presidential candidacy of comic Stephen Colbert and the super PAC supporting him, led by fellow Comedy Central star Jon Stewart, host of "The Daily Show."
Colbert's and Stewart's seriously funny campaign is also a seriously pointed indictment of the ridiculous "rules" governing super PACs, which were created two years ago after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United vs. FEC. In that controversial case, the court ruled 5-4 that the Constitution prohibits limits on independent political spending by corporations and unions.
Technically known as "independent expenditure committees," super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to advocate for or against a candidate, as long as they're not coordinating with a candidate's campaign. That proviso is a key target of Colbert and Stewart, who mock the fact that super PACs are often led by former staffers of the candidate they're backing. "Coordination" may not be taking place in a legal sense, but only because it isn't necessary. Everyone involved is already firmly in sync strategically. And it's even easy for a candidate to demand tactical changes -- he can simply suggest them during a press conference.
Anonymity rules in this new order. Millions can be spent on ads ripping a candidate without any meaningful identification of whose money is behind them.
Now the nonpartisan, nonprofit Sunlight Foundation is trying to force some transparency and accountability onto super PACs. It has proposed that Congress enact rules that would ensure timely disclosure of donors who fund independent expenditures and electioneering by super PACs. Top funders of campaign ads would be listed in the ad, forcing them to stand behind their message and informing voters whether corporate, union or some other special interest is delivering it.
Sunlight Foundation officials admit their proposal is no panacea for what ails our election system, but we agree that it's a critical first step toward empowering voters to make informed choices.
Congress should act with urgency to put these sensible rules in place. Otherwise, this year's races for the presidency and Congress stand to become a record free-for-all of irresponsible, unaccountable mudslinging and distortion.
That could happen even with the proposed rules, of course. One can hope, though, that at least the purveyors would think twice before dragging their own reputations through the mud.
Visit SunlightFoundation.com to learn more about the organization's government transparency and accountability efforts.
Colbert's and Stewart's seriously funny campaign is also a seriously pointed indictment of the ridiculous "rules" governing super PACs, which were created two years ago after the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Citizens United vs. FEC. In that controversial case, the court ruled 5-4 that the Constitution prohibits limits on independent political spending by corporations and unions.
Technically known as "independent expenditure committees," super PACs can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money to advocate for or against a candidate, as long as they're not coordinating with a candidate's campaign. That proviso is a key target of Colbert and Stewart, who mock the fact that super PACs are often led by former staffers of the candidate they're backing. "Coordination" may not be taking place in a legal sense, but only because it isn't necessary. Everyone involved is already firmly in sync strategically. And it's even easy for a candidate to demand tactical changes -- he can simply suggest them during a press conference.
Anonymity rules in this new order. Millions can be spent on ads ripping a candidate without any meaningful identification of whose money is behind them.
Now the nonpartisan, nonprofit Sunlight Foundation is trying to force some transparency and accountability onto super PACs. It has proposed that Congress enact rules that would ensure timely disclosure of donors who fund independent expenditures and electioneering by super PACs. Top funders of campaign ads would be listed in the ad, forcing them to stand behind their message and informing voters whether corporate, union or some other special interest is delivering it.
Sunlight Foundation officials admit their proposal is no panacea for what ails our election system, but we agree that it's a critical first step toward empowering voters to make informed choices.
Congress should act with urgency to put these sensible rules in place. Otherwise, this year's races for the presidency and Congress stand to become a record free-for-all of irresponsible, unaccountable mudslinging and distortion.
That could happen even with the proposed rules, of course. One can hope, though, that at least the purveyors would think twice before dragging their own reputations through the mud.
Visit SunlightFoundation.com to learn more about the organization's government transparency and accountability efforts.
Comments
(