Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

pampango

(24,692 posts)
Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:12 PM Jan 2012

Elizabeth Warren, Scott Brown sign a ban on super PAC campaign ads in their Massachusetts race

The 2012 elections will undoubtedly see an unprecedented injection of third-party influence, thanks to the Citizens United ruling and the subsequent advent of super PACs, and now, “super super PACS” — groups that “not only raise mega cash to promote candidates, but give money to candidates’ campaigns” directly.

Attempting to stem the tide of undue influence, Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren (D) and her opponent Sen. Scott Brown (R) signed a ban on third-party ads. Brown had sent Warren two previous proposals but Warren objected to “some of the loopholes” that remained. Warren sent back a signed proposals with “clarifications to make it stronger.” The ad ban is “designed to control what is already prodigious outside spending on the race. By some projections, the campaign could cost at least $60 million” with at least “$20 million being spent by special interest groups with an interest in the outcome.”

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/23/409141/elizabeth-warren-sen-scott-brown-sign-a-ban-on-super-pac-campaign-ads-in-their-massachusetts-race/

5 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Elizabeth Warren, Scott Brown sign a ban on super PAC campaign ads in their Massachusetts race (Original Post) pampango Jan 2012 OP
as if outside interests are obligated to follow such a ban lol. nt msongs Jan 2012 #1
How can they prevent ads run by groups they have no connection to? rfranklin Jan 2012 #2
That doesn't make sense. Aren't these PAC's supposed to be "independent"?? northoftheborder Jan 2012 #3
Oh I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope ... meegbear Jan 2012 #4
Here's the meat of the matter: MGKrebs Jan 2012 #5
 

rfranklin

(13,200 posts)
2. How can they prevent ads run by groups they have no connection to?
Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:16 PM
Jan 2012

Isn't that the Citizens United model?

northoftheborder

(7,572 posts)
3. That doesn't make sense. Aren't these PAC's supposed to be "independent"??
Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:18 PM
Jan 2012

If they are truly separate and independent, then what control do the candidates have over them?? This makes Colbert's campaign even more significant.

meegbear

(25,438 posts)
4. Oh I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope, I hope ...
Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:19 PM
Jan 2012

Be nice not to be flooded with nonstop bullshit everyday.

MGKrebs

(8,138 posts)
5. Here's the meat of the matter:
Mon Jan 23, 2012, 02:33 PM
Jan 2012

"Brown said his campaign would have to donate 50 percent of the value of any spending on his behalf to a charity of Warren’s choice, and she would have to do the same to a charity of his choosing if he was targeted with an outside ad benefitting her."

(Seems unlikely to actually happen. Loser won't have any money or any reason to comply. Winner only has to deal with potential whining by a future opponent.)

More:

"His campaign manager immediately targeted online ads being paid for by RethinkBrown, a pro-Warren super PAC run by former aides to Governor Deval Patrick, a Democrat like Warren"

"Pro-Warren groups have already outspent pro-Brown groups by about 3-to-1 in Massachusetts, an alarming trend for Brown, whose party is in the minority in the state."

http://www.boston.com/Boston/politicalintelligence/2012/01/scott-brown-elizabeth-warren-battle-for-campaign-public-relations-high-ground/uzas6dzj6PiBxNJDGyKQaP/index.html

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Elizabeth Warren, Scott B...