TribLIVE

| USWorld


 
Larger text Larger text Smaller text Smaller text | Order Photo Reprints

Justices eye restriction on individual's overall donation to political campaigns

About The Tribune-Review
The Tribune-Review can be reached via e-mail or at 412-321-6460.
Contact Us | Video | Photo Reprints

Daily Photo Galleries


By The Washington Post

Published: Thursday, Oct. 3, 2013, 9:27 p.m.

WASHINGTON — The very wealthy could play a much greater role in funding federal candidates and political parties if the Supreme Court rules that a key campaign finance restriction adopted after Watergate is unconstitutional.

Under Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., the court has junked a number of election spending limits as improper restrictions on political expression — perhaps most dramatically with its 2010 Citizens United decision, which wiped out the ban on corporate election spending.

A bold and broad decision by the court in one of its first cases of the new term, Shaun McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which the justices are to hear on Tuesday, could overturn decades of precedent about the remaining power the government has to limit contributions to candidates and parties.

The current case, brought by Shaun McCutcheon, a businessman from Hoover, Ala., and the Republican National Committee, involves a restriction that many Americans are probably unaware of and even fewer could afford to violate: the limit on the overall amount that one person may give during a two-year election cycle to federal candidates, political parties and committees.

That limit is $123,200, including a $48,600 cap on total candidate contributions. If the court sides with McCutcheon, party leaders could set up a joint fundraising committee with their presidential nominee, congressional candidates and state affiliates to accept nearly $3.7 million from an individual in each election cycle, defenders of the limits say.

“A system in which an individual can provide millions of dollars — potentially in response to direct solicitations from the president and members of Congress — to finance parties and their candidates would substantially replicate the Watergate-era and soft-money systems that resulted in well-documented instances of corruption and apparent corruption,” Solicitor General Donald B. Verrilli Jr. told the court in a brief.

 

 
 


Show commenting policy

Most-Read Nation

  1. Deal reached in Ukraine crisis talks, but U.S. remains wary of Russia’s end game
  2. Imam’s influence detailed as NYC terror trial begins
  3. Air Force cheating linked to conflicting leadership messages
  4. Android systems running 4.1.1 softward carry Heartbleed bug
  5. Investment analyst  to get Medal of Honor
  6. Obamacare estimates beaten by 1M
  7. Law firm that cleared Christie recently gave $10K to GOP governors group
  8. Clinton donor pleads guilty in illegal campaign contributions
  9. GAO finds just 1 percent of large partnerships audited by IRS
  10. Another arrest made in abduction of N.C. prosecutor’s father
  11. Husband accused in slaying ate pot candy, police say
Subscribe today! Click here for our subscription offers.