The Supreme Court's ruling in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission has opened the door for wealthy donors to spend even more on political campaigns. It will also require interested citizens to learn some new terminology.
Full Segment:California officials have widened an investigation into the source of $11 million that was mysteriously funneled into the 2012 campaign by a few nonprofit groups.
Even with a tax status that says "social welfare group," a nonprofit organization's spending record can still reveal plenty of political activity. Sometimes too much.
IRS Commissioner John Koskinen appears to be headed toward issuing new IRS regulations that will continue to license section 501(c)(4) groups to improperly launder massive amounts of secret contributions into federal elections.
In this interview, Don Abelson shares his views about think tanks, research integrity, advocacy and lobbying.
It doesn't really matter if a super PAC violated the technical definition of coordination. Contributions to super PACs set up by the candidates' allies are effectively the same as contributions to candidates, which is why they are just as likely to be corrupting.
There are other statutes interpreted by executive agencies, indeed the very same IRS as is involved in King, that would then be forced instantly to revert to the literal meaning of each word.
New regulations must establish a clearly defined, restrictive limit on how much campaign activity a group can engage in and still be eligible for 501(c)(4) tax status.