Supreme Court: no limits on individual campaign contribs

  • News
  • Thread starter jtbell
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Limits
In summary, the Supreme Court has struck down limits on aggregate contributions, allowing individuals to donate more money to political campaigns through PACs. However, individual election contribution limits still remain in place. Many believe that this decision will benefit local and state politics, as campaign finance has often favored the national political status quo. Additionally, in the information age, it is difficult for candidates to hide their public actions, making it harder for money to sway voters.
  • #1
jtbell
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
15,907
5,584
Justices strike down political donor limits (CNN)

No need to funnel your millions through PACs any more, unless I suppose if you want to try to remain anonymous.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Actually, it removes only the limits on aggregate contributions. The individual election contribution limits still stand.
 
  • #3
I think it's for the better in the long run. Campaign finance was always a paper tiger that starved local and state politics while in turn feeding the national political status quo. No amount of money spent on ads could make me vote for something or somebody I don't believe in and in this information age it's pretty hard to hide a candidates public actions with flash and slight of hand.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...-and-losers-from-the-mccutcheon-v-fec-ruling/
 

What is the Supreme Court's ruling on individual campaign contributions?

The Supreme Court has ruled that there are no limits on individual contributions to political campaigns. This means that individuals can donate as much money as they want to support a candidate or political party.

Why did the Supreme Court make this ruling?

The Supreme Court made this ruling based on the First Amendment, which protects the right to free speech. The court believes that limiting individual contributions would be a violation of this right.

How does this ruling affect elections?

This ruling has a significant impact on elections, as it allows wealthy individuals to have a greater influence on the outcome. It also means that candidates may spend more time and resources raising money from individual donors rather than focusing on the issues.

Are there any restrictions on how candidates can use these contributions?

There are still restrictions on how candidates can use these contributions. They cannot use the money for personal expenses, and there are limits on how much they can spend on certain types of advertising.

What are the potential consequences of this ruling?

Some believe that this ruling could lead to corruption and favoritism in politics, as wealthy donors may expect special treatment in return for their contributions. It could also make it more difficult for candidates without access to large sums of money to compete in elections.

Similar threads

Replies
87
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
15
Views
6K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • General Discussion
5
Replies
147
Views
15K
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
32
Views
4K
  • General Discussion
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • General Discussion
Replies
24
Views
9K
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
Views
5K
Back
Top