Objecting to the Declaration of Independence?

by - July 30, 2013

Plaintiff Shaun McCutcheon is trying to figure out why this is so. If the first 18 candidates aren’t corrupted by his contribution, what is so different about candidate No. 19? Or 20? or 100? He thinks the First Amendment ought to allow him to associate with as many candidates as he likes, and to spread his message as far as he can. The Republican party, another plaintiff in the case, raises the same issue about party committees: The law limits an individual to contributing $32,400 to a national political party committee and $5,000 to a PAC, but also imposes an overall limit of $74,600 on all such contributions. So an individual can give the maximum legal contribution to the RNC, and to the Republican Senatorial Committee, but if he does so, he can’t give the otherwise legal maximum to the Republican Congressional Committee. I guess that’s okay if you think it’s more important that Republicans win the Senate than that they keep the House. That part of the case dealing with limits on giving to individual candidates ought to be a slam dunk. The party issue is tougher, because the Court has, in the past, expressed concern that donors could give large, unearmarked contributions to parties that then might pass them on to candidates in accordance with the donor’s wishes, thus creating large, “corrupting” contributions to the candidate. The Court has never quite explained how the donor can assure that an unearmarked contribution is given to the candidate he wants to corrupt, but nonetheless, it has so held.

National Review Online

You May Love To Read