The purpose of the law is to allow unlimited contributions for candidate related ads that are not covered by campaign finance regulations. It is a free speech thing that is a response to previous rulings by the US Supreme Court. In order to segregate these ads from the candidate's own campaign ads, the candidates are prohibited from coordinating with their Super Pacs. These may well be bad laws and in fact I expect Ted Cruz would be among the first to say that they are. But they are the laws we have. And Cruz appears to be in compliance with them.
<iframe src='http://player.theplatform.com/p/7wvmTC/MSNBCEmbeddedOffSite?guid=n_mj_king_151215' height='500' width='635' scrolling='no' border='no' ></iframe>
The law no longer has a purpose. There was campaign finance law designed to put reasonable limits on how much we'd allow moneyed interests to influence elections. Citizens United gutted the law such that what's left is worse than nothing. In the case of Cruz, I think the problem is that Conway exists. Since these are all Cruz's campaign dollars for all practical purposes, his affiliated unaffiliated PACs should be part of his organization. Why it's problematic is that they are maintaining a facade of being independent, and hiding the identities of the people who are funding the speech.
Citizens United was about Hillary trying to stop a movie about her from being shown before an election. The justices asked the Solicitor General if that same reasoning could be used to stop a book from being published, and he said yes. Pretty remarkable.
Do you believe the Cruz campaign and his SuperPACs independently decided to each pay a part of the fee to the megadonors' organization to come up with a combined voter database that both entities will use?
What are you unclear about? Citizens United was a company that produced a film about Hillary. Hillary did not want that movie shown (that's how she rolls). The court ruled it was free speech and could be shown.
Sure, just announce publicly that you are using this resource and how useful it is. Shows the silliness of the law.
Like Mr. Cruz often is, you are technically and factually correct; while glossing over the pervasive real world implications to the detriment of the general welfare. Flipping the issue to "Ms. Clinton didn't want it" and "could ban books" is a gross simplification of the course of the case and the manipulation of the court to get the Conservatives the opinions they wanted.
If they have done that, I expect the decision was reached prior to either the candidate declaring their candidacy and/or the first Super PAC completing its registration, which would be expected and would make all if this above board. In fact, it would make sense for a company that is preparing a candidate's voter database to also market that to other entities that are supporting the candidate. Economically speaking, I would expect this sort of an arrangement to be common, even the norm. Also, I have not seen anything about the database arrangements for the Cruz Campaign. Certainly nothing from a reliable source supporting the statement that "each pay a part of the fee to the megadonors' organization to come up with a combined voter database that both entities will use?" Not that there would be anything wrong with that, if they set it up according to the timing I outlined in my first paragraph above. I did a couple of google searches and did not see anything about that. Would you happen to have a link that supports this statement? It makes me wonder, what are Hillary Clinton's arrangements with her Super PAC(s)? Are they different than this? Has anyone in the media that is so interested in Ted Cruz's Super Pac arrangements demonstrated any similar interest in the Super Pac arrangements for the Democratic frontrunner? If a journalist wanted to root out some corruption, I would expect that Hillary Clinton's Super Pacs, her campaign funding and her "Charitable foundation," from where we already know she received "donations" from some of the most vile regimes on the planet timed exactly with her consideration and approval of funding and other requests that she approved as Secretary of State, would be great place to start.
agree, free speech has pervasive real world implications, that may or may not be detrimental to the general welfare
Meanwhile... http://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/is-cruz-in-trouble-for-leaking-classified-info Is Cruz In Trouble for Leaking Classified Info? There's a flurry of chatter this morning to the effect that Ted Cruz may have released classified information in last night's Republican debate. Marco Rubio hinted at that in the debate itself when he said he would be more careful than Cruz in not releasing classified national security information in a nationally televised debate. Now Sen. Burr (R), the chair of the Senate intelligence committee says that his staff will be looking into whether Cruz did in fact cross the line. It's impossible from the outside to know whether or not Cruz did in fact release protected information. We don't know the details of what was being discussed or which parts of it are considered classified. As with the controversy over Hillary Clinton's emails, much of the question itself is shot through with politics, inherent ambiguity and as often as not dealing with information which may be technically classified but shouldn't be because of rampant over-classification. We'll have more on this shortly. But I think that at this point this is best seen as an intra-Republican political dispute. I strongly suspect that in substantive terms the charge against Cruz is bogus. Marco Rubio has strong reasons to try to trip Cruz up at this point. He is the main obstacle to Rubio moving into a one on one contest with Donald Trump. He's also trying to prove himself as the serious national security candidate vis a vis Cruz - with the latter's hints of libertarianism and lack of relationship with DC neoconservatives. Senate Republicans like Burr meanwhile have two overlapping reasons for wanting to hurt Cruz. First, he's probably not a viable general election candidate. So they don't want him as nominee. Second, most of them despise him personally. As I said, this is best seen as a political fight - rather than a substantive controversy over national security secrets. This isn't to defend Cruz. I'd love to see him get himself in hot water. But I've seen enough of these leaked classified info disputes that they are usually BS driven by political considerations. But even as a political fight it could definitely become a thorn in Cruz's side, if his enemies have enough to go after him with. That is especially so since the GOP has already committed to going after Hillary Clinton for another bogus 'leaked classified material' story.
So it appears we are at the throw crap at the wall and see if it sticks stage of the campaign now. LOL.
Republican establishment hates Cruz - This is the GOP head of the Senate Intelligence Committee looking into this - not Dems (who would love to run against him). It's the political price of being unable to figure out how to work with or develop relationships with colleagues in the Senate.
Apparently you haven't been around very long. This sounds like the first presidential campaign you've followed. LOL at Ted Cruz.
The fact is Rubio is on the committee that is doing this "investigation". This is nothing more than Rubio's buddy trying to make a headline that will never come to fruition to try and make a post debate barb toward Cruz who knows Rubio is lying about his attacks because he has the facts but he chooses to lie about them. One thing is certain, the longer this goes on Rubio is showing who he truly is. He ran using the support of the Tea Party. He ran as far away from that support once he got to DC into the loving arms of lobbyists and establishment elite who are trying to groom their next "candidate". That is why the establishment voice and media are all over his jock and are going after Cruz with everything they have. The establishment got it wrong, like it usually does. The problem is the American people have opened their eyes to it and Ted is using Trump to shield himself from as much of the hatred as possible. Washington Cartel hates American people and true conservative principles. They will now do everything they can to stop Cruz, and he is simply outsmarting them and they are getting desperate.
BTW, The "classified info" Cruz "leaked" last night were numbers used in the WSJ and WAPO in 2014. Perhaps if Rubio bothered showing up for work more often, he'd have known that was public information. Not classified. Nice try though, Rubio camp. Nice try.
these are points in his favor Cruz did not go to the senate to make friends, and that's not why the voters sent him there. He tells the truth about what goes on there, does what he said he would do when campaigning, and holds his colleague's feet to the fire to follow through on their campaign promises. He isn't a back slapper or horse trader. Burr is a creature of DC and the corporatism that infests that city.
