High court ruling sets off race for bigger campaign donations
WASHINGTON — Political parties, election lawyers and some donors are racing to capitalize on the Supreme Court's recent decision striking down the overall limits on what wealthy contributors can give to candidates, parties and political action committees.
Republican officials recently introduced the Republican Victory Fund, a campaign vehicle that will allow a single donor to contribute nearly $100,000 to be split among the Republican National Committee and the two GOP campaign committees working on House and Senate races.
The goal of the joint fundraising plan is to “maximize our donations to help candidates win in November,” Kirsten Kukowski, a Republican National Committee spokeswoman, wrote in an email.
The Supreme Court's decision maintained limits on how much an individual can give to one party or candidate but tossed out the aggregate caps that barred a single donor from giving more than $48,600 to all federal candidates and $74,600 to political parties and PACs in this election cycle.
The Republican Party filed its paperwork with federal regulators less than a week after the high court's ruling April 2 in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission that declared the overall cap on contributions violated the free speech rights of political activists to spread their donations to as many candidates and party committees as they liked.
The Republican National Committee was among the plaintiffs challenging the overall limits.
State laws have started to fall.
Two states have abandoned their overall contribution limits to comply with the ruling: Massachusetts immediately dropped its $12,500 annual limit on what an individual can donate to all candidates for state, county and local offices. On Friday, Maryland election officials announced they will no longer enforce the state's $10,000 limit on what individuals could give to all state candidates in a four-year election cycle.
Both states are home to governors' races this year.
In the end, laws in as many as 18 states and the District of Columbia may be vulnerable to challenge.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Scathing report says college trustees fail in mission
- ISIS beheads American
- NRA’s ad campaign targets Bloomberg’s push to unify advocates of gun control
- Ex-Va. first lady sought credit for loan, sister-in-law says
- Grand jury to hear evidence in Missouri shooting
- Ferguson pledges outreach
- Monsoon rains wreak havoc in Arizona
- Health care data breaches hit 30M patients and counting
- Weight loss differs between the sexes
- Weather keeps Calif. fire in check
- Immigration judge drops case against Ore. woman who drove into leaf pile, killing 2 girls