It could be a seismic shift in how tens of millions of campaign dollars are spent.

Republicans have waged a decades-long battle to blow up the campaign-finance laws that rein in big-money spending. Now, they are making a play that could end in their biggest victory since the Citizens United ruling in 2010.

The GOP is growing increasingly optimistic about their prospects in a little-noticed lawsuit that would allow official party committees and candidates to coordinate freely by removing current spending restrictions. If successful, it would represent a seismic shift in how tens of millions of campaign dollars are spent and upend a well-established political ecosystem for TV advertising.

An eventual victory in the lawsuit, filed last November by the National Republican Senatorial Committee and the National Republican Congressional Committee, would eliminate the need for House and Senate campaign committees of any party to set up separate operations to make so-called independent expenditures to boost candidates with TV ads.

  • Neato@kbin.social
    271·
    1 year ago

    Yeah, and which one gets things done?

    The ones committing crimes and that cheats. The one that throws out centuries and decades old procedural traditions of our legislative body. The one trying to hurt as many people and burn the country down as fast as possible to get their agenda in so they can perform a coup.

    I’m sorry Democrats aren’t burning the country at both ends to succeed, but that’s generally not what non-traitors do.

      • Gadg8eer@lemmy.zipEnglish
        1·
        1 year ago

        The book is only there because reality doesn’t favor the kind, but see how long it takes the kind to be cruel when you burn the rules we lived by, asshole.

        • MajorJimmy@lemmy.world
          2·
          1 year ago

          Hey, no need for insults, bud.

          Any event, you’re correct, the “book” exists because humans couldn’t be trusted to do the right thing (and obviously, still can’t). So because humans can’t be trusted we set up rules they have to follow. But if they still say fuck the rules, then the rules only serve to hinder the side that abides by them.

          I know it’s a scenario of “they did it, so why shouldn’t we” which is not exactly a great reason to go against the “book”, but nonetheless, one side has no regard for the book, while the other side is hamstrung by it. They’re already cruel with the book in place. Watch what happens when they burn it and the other side along with it.

    • Nightwingdragon@lemmy.worldEnglish
      311·
      1 year ago

      I’m sorry Democrats aren’t burning the country at both ends to succeed, but that’s generally not what non-traitors do.

      This is a very idealistic and naive view of politics in general. Politics is cutthroat. The entire political world plays by a completely different set of rules. Nobody cares how you get to the top. The whole point of the game is to get to the top through any means necessary, and then you can impose your will on others.

      Think Game of Thrones, but without the dragons, hot women, and incest.

      Democrats can say “Democrats aren’t burning the country at both ends to succeed, but that’s generally not what non-traitors do.” all they want, but they often end up saying it while they’re sitting on the sidelines. Sad but true in the world of politics: You can take the moral high ground, or you can win in the long run. Pick one.

      EDIT: Downvotes don’t change reality, people. To paraphrase another reply: You can play by the book, but you’ll lose to the ones who burned it.