• givesomefucks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is not a good thing.

    Effective campaigns spend more time getting votes than money.

    I legitimately don’t even know how this much money is even spent, no one watches cable so ad buys are cheap. Spam texts/emails are essentially free, Internet/social media ads are also dirt cheap…

    The only way it makes sense is they’re taking the money and using it to hold those huge fundraiser diners to make more money.

    We’re running the political parties like corporations that only care about profits instead of an organization to get Dems in office.

    The fact that after the election ends the candidates keep access to these funds is a big part of the problem. Win or lose if you have millions left in your campaign account you get to just keep spending it.

    https://www.nhpr.org/politics/2020-11-25/ask-civics-101-what-happens-to-campaign-funds-after-an-election-is-over

    • Rapidcreek@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Well, err, not all funds are campaign funds. Political Action Committee funds, are not campaign funds. So they don’t mind the same rules. But, yes, candidates retain funds they don’t spend and rules apply such as they can’t spend for personal use but can transfer money to other campaigns or to the party. So far Harris, by my read, has transferred 20 million to down ballot campaigns

      • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Political Action Committee funds, are not campaign funds. So they don’t mind the same rules.

        And one of the ways to launder campaign cash after an election is transfer to a PAC that they control…

        A significant amount of that article is about it. That’s why I thought it was relevant enough to link

        There is one significant loophole in this process, however. That is the little-regulated leadership PAC, a political committee that is directly or indirectly established, financed, maintained or controlled by a candidate or an individual holding a federal office. A candidate can opt to transfer their money into one of these entities.

        “And the rules for leadership PACs are completely different than the rules for your official campaign committee,” Deborah explains, “So the personal use rule doesn’t apply there. You can use it for travel, you can use it for dinner, concert tickets, all in the name of fundraising. There’s just not that much scrutiny on it. And politicians have used their leadership PACs quite lavishly. So that’s that’s another that’s a huge loophole that I mean, neither side seems keen on closing at this point.”

        It’s important to note that the FEC has a number of vacancies right now. In order to meet and review audits and complaints, the Committee must comprise at least four members. Currently there are just three, and Congress is unlikely to confirm a fourth soon. Even if someone were to notice wrongdoing or violation in the bounds of a leadership PAC, there isn’t much that could be done.

        Also:

        So far Harris, by my read, has transferred 20 million to down ballot campaigns

        Do you think that’s more than the “victory fund” has taken from state parties this cycle?

        If I took $5 and gave you $2 back how would you feel about me bragging about giving you $2 out of the kindness of my heart?