can someone explain super pac so i can understand it ??

[washamericom]

every time there is a dust up, so many times the origin returns to the superpac.

the candidates say "we're not responsible for our super pacs". but are they in acceptance of that support initially, or ever ??

i know candidates are forbidden to interact, but the relationships are odd, to say the least.

do unions buy commercial time ? why doesn't anyone mention that some union dues are spent on what the union wants. can a republican union person get a rebate if the union supports a dem ??

do we really need government unions that play the government ? isn't that redundant ??

bernie excoriates superpacs, but takes a shitload of dough from unions, i' haven't had a chance to ask him about it, but i will.

this sort of came up on my curiosity radar again when i started hearing marco's and jeb's superpac ads become descendingly nasty.
.
so many questions so little time.
any thoughts ?

 

[Timmy]

It's like a regular PAC . But it was given super election powers in a freak accident .

I think it's just a political group, but they are limited in that they can't be controlled by a candidate .

So Cruzs PAC is for ted . And they can put out all kinds of shit and take all kinds of money . It's cool so long as ted doesn't have any say with them.

You can imagine the ways you could get around that little limitation.

 

[g5000]

SuperPACs are nothing more than a means to circumvent a lot of campaign finance "reforms".

They are also a means by which the supporters of a candidate can sleaze the living shit out of an election and allow a candidate to disavow their tactics while simultaneously benefiting from them.

 

[g5000]

"Candidate X humps donkeys. Send a message to Washington that you don't support donkey-humping by sending Candidate X home.

"Paid for by the Friends of Donkeys Political Action Committee."


CANDIDATE Y: I have never said Candidate X humps donkeys. If he does hump donkeys, that would be terrible. What a horrible thing to do to donkeys. Let's keep talking about whether or not Candidate X humps donkeys for the next ten news cycles, shall we? I'm not saying he does, but it is a serious enough charge that someone should look into it.

 

[Siete]

su·per PAC
noun

1. a type of independent political action committee which may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, and individuals but is not permitted to contribute to or coordinate directly with parties or candidates.
   "in the 2010 congressional races, super PACs spent over $60 million"

 

[washamericom]

It's like a regular PAC . But it was given super election powers in a freak accident .

I think it's just a political group, but they are limited in that they can't be controlled by a candidate .

So Cruzs PAC is for ted . And they can put out all kinds of shit and take all kinds of money . It's cool so long as ted doesn't have any say with them.

You can imagine the ways you could get around that little limitation.

thanks, can you point me to some regs somewhere ?? what was the freak accident ? is there any parallel between super pacs and super delegates. doesn't hillary have both ??

 

[washamericom]

su·per PAC
noun

1. a type of independent political action committee which may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, and individuals but is not permitted to contribute to or coordinate directly with parties or candidates.
   "in the 2010 congressional races, super PACs spent over $60 million"

was this part of the thing obama railed on the supreme court at the sotu when alito mouthed "not true".

do any of the candidates now take foreign money ?

didn't obama say he wouldn't take private money before he did. it's been so long since i've done my own tax return, do they still ask if you want to donate a dollar, but it won't actually come from you. i always thought that was strange.

 

[Kosh]

So what exactly is a PAC? According to Michael Beckel of the Washington, D.C.-based Center for Responsive Politics, a non-profit and non-partisan organization that tracks money in politics, traditional PACs represent businesses, labor unions or ideological interests: examples would be the Microsoft PAC, the Teamsters PAC and the National Rifle Association PAC. "An organization's PAC will solicit money from the group's employees or members and make contributions in the name of the PAC to candidates and political parties," Beckel says.

PACS have been influencing elections and campaigns since they first appeared in the 1940s, but there are limits to what they can donate in campaign and party contributions. The amount of money PACs can give per election -- meaning a primary, general or special election -- is capped at $5,000 per candidate. Additionally, PACs can give no more than $15,000 each year to a national party.

And when it comes to actually raising the money they can use to contribute to candidates or political parties, PACs also face limitations: Individuals can give no more than $5,000 per year to a PAC [source: Beckel].

Citizens can contribute money directly to parties and candidates, as well, but those donations also have limits. Every calendar year, individuals can give a maximum of $30,800 to a national political party committee, such as the Republican National Committee, and the ceiling for individual contributions to a candidate is $2,500 per election [source: Center for Responsive Politics].

Things have changed though. Now the emergence of Super PACs has the potential to fundamentally alter the landscape of money in politics, and also represents a sharp departure from previous restrictions on financial contributions. That's because as of July 22, 2010, the FEC green-lighted Super PACs all but eliminating the previous financial donation limitations. Thanks to the FEC ruling, individuals, corporations and unions can now contribute unlimited cash to Super PACs, which essentially means there is no ceiling to how much money is injected into elections.

The main prohibition placed on Super PACs, aside from having to report their expenditures and contributors to the FEC, is that they cannot coordinate directly with the campaign staff of individual candidates. (Regular PACs have to abide by these same mandates as well) [source: Beckel]. There is another key difference. Super PACs can't contribute directly to candidates the way PACs do. The money Super PACs raise can only be used for such things as creating TV or radio ads supporting or excoriating particular candidates.

How Super PACs Work

Follow the money:

Top Organization Contributors | OpenSecrets

Political Action Committees | OpenSecrets

 

[Timmy]

It's like a regular PAC . But it was given super election powers in a freak accident .

I think it's just a political group, but they are limited in that they can't be controlled by a candidate .

So Cruzs PAC is for ted . And they can put out all kinds of shit and take all kinds of money . It's cool so long as ted doesn't have any say with them.

You can imagine the ways you could get around that little limitation.

thanks, can you point me to some regs somewhere ?? what was the freak accident ? is there any parallel between super pacs and super delegates. doesn't hillary have both ??

I'd start with Wikipedia .

And the freak accident was when a mild mannered PAC was bitten by a radioactive Justice Scallia .

 

[jillian]

every time there is a dust up, so many times the origin returns to the superpac.

the candidates say "we're not responsible for our super pacs". but are they in acceptance of that support initially, or ever ??

i know candidates are forbidden to interact, but the relationships are odd, to say the least.

do unions buy commercial time ? why doesn't anyone mention that some union dues are spent on what the union wants. can a republican union person get a rebate if the union supports a dem ??

do we really need government unions that play the government ? isn't that redundant ??

bernie excoriates superpacs, but takes a shitload of dough from unions, i' haven't had a chance to ask him about it, but i will.

this sort of came up on my curiosity radar again when i started hearing marco's and jeb's superpac ads become descendingly nasty.
.
so many questions so little time.
any thoughts ?

what don't you understand?

they're organizations set up to funnel unlimited and untraceable funds to campaigns

 

[Kosh]

su·per PAC
noun

1. a type of independent political action committee which may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, and individuals but is not permitted to contribute to or coordinate directly with parties or candidates.
   "in the 2010 congressional races, super PACs spent over $60 million"

was this part of the thing obama railed on the supreme court at the sotu when alito mouthed "not true".

do any of the candidates now take foreign money ?

No not since Bubba got busted in 90's..

The 1996 United States campaign finance controversy was an alleged effort by the People's Republic of China to influence domestic American politics prior to and during the Clinton administration and also involved the fund-raising practices of the administration itself.

1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[jillian]

su·per PAC
noun

1. a type of independent political action committee which may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, and individuals but is not permitted to contribute to or coordinate directly with parties or candidates.
   "in the 2010 congressional races, super PACs spent over $60 million"

was this part of the thing obama railed on the supreme court at the sotu when alito mouthed "not true".

do any of the candidates now take foreign money ?

No not since Bubba got busted in 90's..


The 1996 United States campaign finance controversy was an alleged effort by the People's Republic of China to influence domestic American politics prior to and during the Clinton administration and also involved the fund-raising practices of the administration itself.

1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

that isn't what gave them their limitless funds... citizen's united did.

and who is bubba, ijit?

 

[Kosh]

su·per PAC
noun

1. a type of independent political action committee which may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, and individuals but is not permitted to contribute to or coordinate directly with parties or candidates.
   "in the 2010 congressional races, super PACs spent over $60 million"

was this part of the thing obama railed on the supreme court at the sotu when alito mouthed "not true".

do any of the candidates now take foreign money ?

No not since Bubba got busted in 90's..


The 1996 United States campaign finance controversy was an alleged effort by the People's Republic of China to influence domestic American politics prior to and during the Clinton administration and also involved the fund-raising practices of the administration itself.

1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

that isn't what gave them their limitless funds... citizen's united did.

and who is bubba, ijit?

See the far left drone religious dogma appears right on cue..

See how they deny and try and cover up their won history.

 

[LoneLaugher]

su·per PAC
noun

1. a type of independent political action committee which may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, and individuals but is not permitted to contribute to or coordinate directly with parties or candidates.
   "in the 2010 congressional races, super PACs spent over $60 million"

was this part of the thing obama railed on the supreme court at the sotu when alito mouthed "not true".

do any of the candidates now take foreign money ?

didn't obama say he wouldn't take private money before he did. it's been so long since i've done my own tax return, do they still ask if you want to donate a dollar, but it won't actually come from you. i always thought that was strange.

Man..you are a monumental hack.

In your mind....this thread which YOU started.....is a way for you to express your disdain for Obama? Is that it?

Fucking nutbags. Liberals and conservatives both express a desire to reign in interest groups and shady campaign financiers. BUT....ONLY LIBERALS WILL DO IT IF GIVEN THE CHANCE. The fucking money is so lopsided in favor of conservatives....that liberals have had to play in the mud just to stay competitive.

Dupe.

 

[g5000]

thanks, can you point me to some regs somewhere ?? what was the freak accident ? is there any parallel between super pacs and super delegates. doesn't hillary have both ??

Okay, here is how it works.

Basically, there are three types of organizations relevant to political activity.

A 501(c)(3) is what is most commonly called a "charity". Think Red Cross or a food bank. The names of the donors to these organizations do not have to be reported. In exchange, they are not allowed to do any political activity of any kind. All donations to a charity are tax deductible and the charity's income is tax exempt.

A 501(c)(4) is supposed to be mainly focused on "social welfare". I'll let others debate on what the difference is between "charity" and "social welfare", but for purposes of this discussion, a 501(c)(4) is allowed to do some political activity, but it's main work must involve "social welfare". The donations to these organizations are not tax deductible, but the organization's income is tax exempt. And, most importantly, the names of the donors do not have to be reported.

And that is where things get ugly. Political operatives have stretched the living shit out of the spirit of the 501(c)(4) restrictions about "primary activity" and "social welfare". If a 501(c)(4) is caught doing political activity as its main purpose, it loses its tax exempt status and it loses the anonymity of its donors.

So you might have a 501(c)(4) which airs some nakedly political ads in which they accuse a candidate of donkey humping, and than attempt to meet the non-political primary activity social welfare requirement by running "public service ads" about the perils of donkey humping and its destructive effects on America. See how that works?

And now we come to SuperPACs. SuperPACs can do whatever the hell they want. They can be all political, all the time. But they are not tax exempt, nor are their donations. But the most inconvenient part is they have to report the names of their donors. It is this lack of anonymity which has caused political operatives to instead to try to hide under the 501(c)(4) umbrella of secrecy.


Whew! Got all that?

 

[Missourian]

Ted Cruz Campaign Posted Hours of Raw, Awkward Ad Footage on YouTube (for use by Super Pacs)

 

[Kosh]

su·per PAC
noun

1. a type of independent political action committee which may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, and individuals but is not permitted to contribute to or coordinate directly with parties or candidates.
   "in the 2010 congressional races, super PACs spent over $60 million"

was this part of the thing obama railed on the supreme court at the sotu when alito mouthed "not true".

do any of the candidates now take foreign money ?

didn't obama say he wouldn't take private money before he did. it's been so long since i've done my own tax return, do they still ask if you want to donate a dollar, but it won't actually come from you. i always thought that was strange.

Man..you are a monumental hack.

In your mind....this thread which YOU started.....is a way for you to express your disdain for Obama? Is that it?

Fucking nutbags. Liberals and conservatives both express a desire to reign in interest groups and shady campaign financiers. BUT....ONLY LIBERALS WILL DO IT IF GIVEN THE CHANCE. The fucking money is so lopsided in favor of conservatives....that liberals have had to play in the mud just to stay competitive.

Dupe.

Oh the irony impaired far left dorms and their comments!

Especially when they spew their religious dogma..

Top Organization Contributors | OpenSecrets

 

[Zander]

Super PACs are a blight on the electoral system and need to be eliminated. As Jillian stated, they are a method to funnel unlimited and untraceable cash to campaigns. They are not supposed to coordinate (wink, nod) with the campaigns. But they all do and everyone just accepts it. We've only had these things for 2 elections, and so far the experiment has been a grand failure. It's time to end them and their pernicious influence over our elections.

Wanna know what happens to the money that is left over in a Super PAC after the election? Congress long ago passed a law limiting what candidates can do with unused campaign cash — in particular, they can't take it home with them. But that law doesn't apply to Super PACs. They can do anything they want with it- including spending it on themselves as salary or bonus, or even a fancy new yacht. There are no rules at all.......

 

[g5000]

Super PACs are a blight on the electoral system and need to be eliminated. As Jillian stated, they are a method to funnel unlimited and untraceable cash to campaigns.

SuperPac donor names are required to be reported, by law.

 

[g5000]

Congress long ago passed a law limiting what candidates can do with unused campaign cash — in particular, they can't take it home with them.

However, if a candidate spent his own money on his campaign, he can pay himself back with donations to his campaign.

Trump claims he is spending his own money on his campaign, but I bet dollars to donuts he will dip into the donations to pay himself back every penny.