They are employing innovative financial arrangements, such as obtaining undisclosed de facto loans from prominent donors as “bridge funding” or generating advertising revenue from a candidate’s podcast. Additionally, they are persistently leveraging loopholes in longstanding anti-coordination guidelines.
Super PACs are playing an increasingly significant role in election campaigns. The amount spent on independent expenditures in this cycle is nearly 2.5 times higher compared to the same point in 2020. Given the challenges candidates face in raising small-dollar donations, the influence of super PAC funding could become even more crucial as the election cycle progresses.
The 2010 ruling in the case of Citizens United has paved the way for corporations, labor unions, and other organizations to spend unlimited amounts of money, as long as they do not coordinate with campaigns. This lack of enforcement has allowed these groups to exploit loopholes and further their agendas.
Super PACs have already spent over $430 million on independent expenditures in federal races this cycle, according to FEC data. This represents a significant increase from the $176 million spent at the same point in 2020.
Outside groups have embraced their expanded role by adopting new fundraising tactics and establishing financial relationships.
A security consultant, who is also the largest vendor for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s independent presidential campaign, has made repeated million-dollar donations to a super PAC supporting Kennedy. However, these donations are later refunded, allowing the group to include them in their fundraising totals instead of treating them as loans to be paid back.
The payments and refunds made by American Values 2024 are referred to as “bridge funding.” A campaign finance complaint has been filed by the Democratic National Committee regarding this matter, although it is not expected to be resolved until after the election. American Values 2024 initially proposed the possibility of assisting Kennedy in getting on the ballot in certain states, which would be an unprecedented role for a super PAC. However, they later retracted that statement.
Super PACs are now playing a role in connecting a candidate’s external activities to their political endeavors.
iHeartMedia, the host of a podcast featuring Senator Ted Cruz, has made substantial contributions to a super PAC supporting Cruz in anticipation of the competitive U.S. Senate race in Texas. The donations, which amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars, were derived from a portion of the podcast’s advertising revenue. Rachel Nelson, a spokesperson for iHeartMedia, verified this information and stated that Senator Cruz does not receive payment for his role as the podcast’s host. The Houston Chronicle was the first to report on these payments.
Super PACs took their influence to new heights during the GOP presidential primary.
The super PAC supporting Florida Governor Ron DeSantis’ campaign gained notoriety for its actions. Initially, it accepted over $80 million from DeSantis’ previous gubernatorial campaign, which was allowed because DeSantis had relinquished control of the committee before the funds were transferred. Additionally, the super PAC frequently invited DeSantis as a “special guest” to events in GOP primary states. Furthermore, the super PAC launched a field operation in Iowa, which received praise from DeSantis’ campaign. This demonstrates how the super PAC assumed many responsibilities typically associated with a presidential campaign.
The pro-DeSantis super PAC, Never Back Down, has faced multiple campaign finance complaints from external organizations. However, these complaints remain unresolved. Advocates argue that the slow response time of the FEC in addressing these complaints makes it easier for super PACs to operate without facing consequences.
During the 2016 presidential primaries, several super PACs supporting GOP candidates took advantage of new fundraising tactics. They utilized fundraising texts and digital ads, which allowed donors to contribute directly to the campaigns. This approach was unprecedented in previous primary elections.
According to Michael Beckel, a researcher at Issue One, a nonpartisan organization advocating for reform on various issues, including money in politics, the novel practices implemented by super PACs represent an advancement, drawing from successful strategies employed in previous election cycles.
According to Beckel, the practice of posting B-roll footage online during elections, which allows super PACs to use it, was common in the early post- Citizens United era. However, he notes that the ways in which candidates and outside groups communicate and convey messages to each other have become more sophisticated and intricate.
Campaigns often engage in a practice known as “redboxing.” This involves providing public instructions to super PACs, indicating the desired messaging that would support their campaign. Typically, these instructions are highlighted with a red box on the campaign’s website. Ethics watchdogs have expressed concerns about the potential coordination between super PACs and campaigns through this practice. However, the FEC has sanctioned it, arguing that public statements do not constitute coordination.
According to a recent study published in the Election Law Journal, the midterms saw over 200 federal candidates engaging in the practice. This number is significantly higher than what was previously known, highlighting the widespread prevalence of this practice. It is important to note that comprehensive data for earlier cycles has not been available.
Redboxing remains a popular trend among consumers.
In the Democratic primary for Pennsylvania’s 12th Congressional District, Rep. Summer Lee (D-Pa.) and challenger Bhavini Patel, a councilmember from Edgewood Borough, have prominently displayed red boxes on their respective websites. These red boxes have caught the attention of super PACs, who have incorporated the suggested messages into their ads.
According to Patel’s website, Lee has been accused of wanting to “dismantle” the Democratic Party. Similarly, an ad from Moderate PAC claims that Lee also wants to dismantle the Democratic Party.
On Lee’s website, a red box highlights the fact that there are attacks against her, which are being funded by GOP billionaire Jeff Yass. Furthermore, a recent pro-Lee advertisement from Justice Democrats also acknowledges this, stating that these attacks are “funded by a Republican billionaire.”
Ethics advocates have expressed frustration due to the ongoing boundary-pushing, as their efforts to increase enforcement by the FEC and other entities have yielded little results.
“We lodged complaints against super PACs supporting presidential candidates, but unfortunately, they were disregarded. We escalated the matter to the Justice Department, yet they too turned a blind eye,” stated Fred Wertheimer, a seasoned lawyer specializing in campaign finance matters since the 1970s. Currently serving as the president and CEO of Democracy 21, a non-profit organization advocating for more stringent campaign finance reform, Wertheimer expressed frustration at the lack of action taken by relevant authorities. “Clearly, this disregard for accountability is widely known among the public,” he added.
