NorthIowaToday.com

Founded in 2010

News & Entertainment for Mason City, Clear Lake & the Entire North Iowa Region

US Supreme Court drops more barriers to large campaign contributions

U.S. Supreme Court
U.S. Supreme Court

WASHINGTON – The US Supreme Court today – by a narrow 5-4 ruling – declared unconstitutional federal limits on aggregate campaign contributions, allowing political donors to make more large contributions to candidates for office.

Today’s ruling eliminates the limit on what an individual political donor can give to all candidates and parties, combined (called the “aggregate limit”).

The aggregate limit had the effect of restricting how many candidates or committees a donor may support, to the extent permitted by campaign contribution base limits.

The base limits of contributions were left intact and are still set at $2,600 per election to a candidate ($5,200 total for the primary and general elections); $32,400 per year to a national party committee;1 $10,000 per year to a state or local party committee; and $5,000 per year to a political action committee, or “PAC.”

Donors will violate law only if they specify to the candidate a favor in exchange for the contribution.  An example of a favor might be a yes or a no vote on a particular piece of legislation.

“The Government has a strong interest, no less critical to our democratic system, in combatting corruption and its appearance,” said Chief Justice John G. Roberts in supporting the ruling. “We have, however, held that this interest must be limited to a specific kind of corruption – quid pro quo corruption – in order to ensure that the Government’s efforts do not have the effect of restricting the First Amendment right of citizens to choose who shall govern them.”

The ruling of the majority also stated that “the right to participate in democracy through political contributions is protected by the First Amendment, but that right is not absolute. Congress may regulate campaign contributions to protect against corruption or the appearance of corruption.”

In dissenting, Justice Stephen Breyer concluded that the justices in support of the ruling “understates the importance of pro­tecting the political integrity of our governmental institutions. It creates a loophole that will allow a single individual to contribute millions of dollars to a political party or to a candidate’s campaign.” Breyer also said that the plurality defines “corruption” too narrowly.

Ken Sagar at Labor Temple in Mason City
Ken Sagar at Labor Temple in Mason City

Immediately following the ruling, the Iowa Federation of Labor released a statement from President Ken Sagar.

“The rich just got more powerful, with this decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, and the workers in America were just served a major step backwards in democracy,” Sagar said. “This decision will put control of elections, and our country in the hands of the few. We are heading towards a government where the power will be vested in the rich 1%.”

[poll random]

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Even more news:

Watercooler
Copyright 2024 – Internet Marketing Pros. of Iowa, Inc.
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x