|
Giant Squid posted:Yeah, it kind of blew my mind that literally being business partners with someone running a PAC doesn't count as coordination. I was going to say that's 527s but I looked it up, and... they're not allowed to "expressly advocate" for or against a candidate or party. But groups like Swift Boat Veterans for Truth are/were 527s and apparently what happens in reality is they can do whatever they want and maybe the FEC will fine them two or three years after the fact. There's also the 501(c)s but really nothing loving matters anymore. edit: I'm not sure but there may not even be any legal designation for the "trash but not endorse" thing other than as a fig leaf re: coordination. Polygynous fucked around with this message at 01:11 on Feb 7, 2016 |
#
¿
Feb 7, 2016 01:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 22:37 |
|
|
Poking around wikipedia, I don't think so. Not necessarily anyway? 527 (and 501(c)3/4) are from the tax code, while PAC seems to just be a general designation or more explicitly regarding election law: "At the U.S. federal level, an organization becomes a PAC when it receives or spends more than $2,600 for the purpose of influencing a federal election, according to the Federal Election Campaign Act.[3] At the state level, an organization becomes a PAC according to the state's election laws." edit: On the other hand, from the 527 article: quote:Technically, almost all political committees, including state, local, and federal candidate committees, traditional political action committees, "Super PACs", and political parties are "527s." However, in common practice the term is usually applied only to such organizations that are not regulated under state or federal campaign finance laws because they do not "expressly advocate" for the election or defeat of a candidate or party. ...and goes on to mention basically point 3 in your OP re: Speechnow.org v. FEC. Polygynous fucked around with this message at 01:52 on Feb 7, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 7, 2016 01:41
|
|