A Constitutional Treatment for the Marketing campaign Cash Aristocracy – InsideSources

Conservatives are awakening to a disturbing new reality: we are now being outperformed by a stream of campaign money from liberal donors living in deep blue states. Overall, the Democrats outperformed the Republicans in the 2020 federal races by a massive $ 8.4 billion to $ 5.3 billion, reversing the trends of recent presidential cycles. In the shell game for secret money Joe Biden outdid Donald Trump by six to one. And for the first time in recent years, business interests – from Wall Street to the healthcare industry and beyond –now spend more on Democrats than Republicans.

As a former Republican Senator and freedom-conscious Conservative in New Hampshire, I have long been fundamentally concerned about the corrosive effects of unlimited non-government spending in our political system on our democracy. The notion that such contributions would neither create corruption nor cause Americans to lose confidence in our republic – as the Supreme Court argued in its Citizens United ruling – is completely disconnected from reality. I also know from conversations with other Conservatives that many have deep reservations about the money race outside the state, but are not prepared to give up the former advantage of the Republicans here. Now that the tide has turned on us, it is time for Conservatives to return to the First Principle.

Our constitution protects American citizens from an isolated, unified government. The 10th amendment reserves the states and people all powers that the federal government was not expressly granted. It underpins the dull motto of my state: “Live free or die.” But the money aristocracy of the blue state struggle gutted federalism, our central protection of the constitution against the tyranny that grows in the dark swamps of concentrated power.

The left is using its money advantage for the blue state to surgically target and overwhelm Swing State, Swing Congressional District, and Swing Statehouse Control Elections. While Republicans did remarkably well in voting races in 2020, the House and Senate candidates with the most money won over the past 11 cycles 92 and 80 percent all the time. In almost every swing election, the new kingmaker focuses on nongovernmental funds sourced from a small number of extremely wealthy individuals and brokers who, in most cases, control the flow of financiers. Instead of state voters and party activists, this new aristocracy is choosing our candidates for us. Basis, locally funded candidates are unprofitable and invisible. The candidates have lost control of their own campaigns. Local and state priorities have been submerged. Most critical to what remains of federalism is any swing election nationalized.

Just look at the two Georgia Senate races that led the Senate to democratic control. These races were the most expensive ever with nearly $ 900 million distributed among Georgia voters.

The race alone between Democrat Jon Ossoff and Republican incumbent David Perdue was incredible $ 510 million in total expenditure, with national expenditure outside the group exceeding the expenditure of the candidates themselves. In comparison, prior to 2018, Pennsylvania was the Senate’s most expensive race of all time $ 180 million.

And if liberal billionaires funding such races aren’t bad enough, the shell game of harmless sounding organizations giving each other and then SuperPACs, with the original donors of that money often hidden from view, means there is no way of knowing whether the original The source of the contributions even comes from this country. Entrepreneur two years ago Imaad Zuberi pleaded guilty to forwarding illegal donations from a Saudi citizen to Barack Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. With vicious foreign interests playing a more active role in the American election, It is likely that significant illegal foreign contributions will be laundered in US SuperPACs.

The solution lies in the Constitution itself – a 28th amendment designed to help curb the corrupt influence of concentrated money on politics. The corruption crisis is so obvious to Republican voters that more than two thirds of us Support a 28th amendment to the Constitution to restore power to Congress and states and to set limits on non-running campaign funds.

Yes, a 28th amendment would approve limits. But it would preserve freedom by completely delegating the “how” to the legislature. Montana may want to reinstate its corporate contributions ban law. New Hampshire may want to enact a donor-voter bill banning non-state campaign funds. Congress may decide to allow greater direct contributions from identified individuals to candidates, but limit the flow of campaign funds through outside groups. The need for a 28th Amendment is enforced by fundamental conservative principles and by our founders’ vision of government accountable only to the governed and free from the risks of corruption and tyranny associated with concentrated power.