.
Feedback

Poll: Can Billionaires Buy Elections Under Rules Allowing Donor Anonymity?

La Jolla’s Irwin and Joan Jacobs have given at least $2.18 million* to Democrats, and aren’t alone.

The Aug. 13 cover of Time magazine is dramatic. But is it true? Can the White House be bought for $2.5 billion?  Can billionaires pumping money into super PACS—sometime under the cover of anonymity—buy enough advertising to sway elections? See how Joan and Irwin Jacobs stack up, for example.  Both GOP and Democratic donors use 501(c)4 groups to spend unlimited amounts and avoid being publicly revealed. Should the public be concerned?

Edititor’s note: An earlier version of this poll carried a headline that incorrectly reported the Jacobses’ donations as $2.18 billion.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from La Jolla Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Batman August 10, 2012 at 03:54 pm
When Obama's done the White House will be in forclosure.
Batman August 10, 2012 at 03:57 pm
Well, I like cars too. Go Romney!
Doug Curlee August 10, 2012 at 04:01 pm
this is nothing new.. politicians have been BUYING, not WINNING, elections for a few generations now..
it's just that, in the wake of the supreme court's idiotic decision in the citizens united case, it's never been more blatant than it is now.. and it's only going to get worse.. the only saving grace for us is that we'll be spared much of the attack commercials here in californis.. at least in the presidential race.. there's no need to contest it here..california will be overwhelmingly for obama and the democrats..romney needn't even bother to campaign much here..not that he would anyway..it'd just be wasted money he'll need elsewhere.. doug
laurie michaels August 11, 2012 at 11:11 am
Fortunately there are plenty of wealthy generous Democrats to offset the greedy selfish Repulicans.... and Batman I'm not ashamed to use my real name. How about you?
Ron Selkovitch August 11, 2012 at 12:36 pm
The biggest danger to our democracy is the power of the rich and powerful to both influence our thoughts with super packs and directly buy our government with cash.
The Tea Party scares me, because if it were to gain power it would diminish the power of government while doing nothing to reduce the power of money.
Things I Learned August 11, 2012 at 12:50 pm
Beware! Beware! The Tea Party wants to take over the government and leave us alone! Reducing government power won't reduce the power of money because people will still throw money at government even when it is powerless.
Things I Learned August 11, 2012 at 12:51 pm
You should not use fake names.
Stan August 11, 2012 at 12:57 pm
Gee, will the Jacobs and George Soros balance out the Koch Brothers? Can Qualcomm survive Obamacare? Why are the Jews still voting Democratic when Obama is helping establish Muslim Caliphates in the Middle East? Will the Jacobs like Sharia Law? I guess it doesn't matter when the top 1% own 35% and the top 10% own 75% of the nation's wealth. They can always jump in their private jets and go to their chateaus and gold when the SHTF, leaving us to fight each other for survival in the world they designed.
cathy zmijewski August 11, 2012 at 01:02 pm
I also question the (Billion) amount stated in this article?
Sadly, the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision in 2010, has led to massive donations by outside spending groups, many of which are not required to disclose their donors. These Super PACs which can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money, have spent more than $165 million as of July 30. The pro-Romney "Restore Our Future" PAC, the largest of all, has spent about $55 million as of July 30. I believe by the time we are done with this election the average citizen will be shocked at how elections are being bought outright. Even as the total dollar amounts jockey for top bid, the Romney campaign is funded mostly by Large contributions by fewer people and the Obama campaign is being funded by smaller donations, but by a higher amount of individuals. I worry more about the large individual donations. These individuals and Super-PACS are going to expect something in return for these donations, and it's not favors where the average citizen benefits. It's time for congress to create legislation that overturns the Citizens United decision.
LaMar Brown August 11, 2012 at 01:49 pm
It always scares me a little bit to read these comments. Many are merely reiterations of misinformation from their favorite news station or radio show. If you check with independent, non-partisan studies, Public records show that only 37 individuals have given 56% of all money to Superpacs, with the vast majority favoring Republicans over Democrats. Pacs have received amounts of well over $319 million dollars http://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php. That's an AVERAGE of $4.8 million dollars for EACH of those 37 people. 94% of that total SuperPac money comes from just a little under 1,100 people which would show those 1040 people are giving about $132,000 each. (MotherJones.com) Independent analysts, confirmed by fact checkers, confirm that the the Romney budget gives huge tax cuts to the wealthy, while increasing the tax burden on the middle class. Independent analysts confirm that the Ryan budget decreases the tax burden of the rich while doing away with Social Security and Medicare benefits, America's safety net. Should you be afraid of the money going into the PACs? I am, and I am one of the ones who would benefit from the Republican budgets. Using the tax calculator, I would decrease my taxes by $20,000 under the Republican budgets. But, is that the right thing to do for America? Not for me. America takes care of it's own. It's a moral obligation.
Jay Berman August 11, 2012 at 01:52 pm
No ... last election, Oceanside had 2 iniatives on the ballot, one was vacancy decontrol, it eventually allows trailer park owners to get market rents and puts an end to rent control for new tenants. Park owners and their associations poured a fortune into this prop .. the opposition was poorly funded ... the oposition won by a large margin ... Sure, big money helps get the word out, I'd like to think folks are smarter than believing anything they get in the mail or see on TV ..
cathy zmijewski August 11, 2012 at 01:53 pm
The Koch brothers have spent 40 million to Jacobs 1 million.
Not that I agree with either being able to contribute that much. IT always comes with strings attached
Jay Berman August 11, 2012 at 01:55 pm
I think we need a constitutional amendment that allows only citizens to contribute only to those they can vote for (you can't give money to a senator in another state ..) if federal elections - any amount, your name and amount is public ... corps, unions, special interests, PACs may not be involved financially in any federal campaign ..
cathy zmijewski August 11, 2012 at 03:04 pm
Thank you LaMar, Brown. That has to be one of the most sane comments that I have read on a comment section's page in a while. I rarely reply, ( not sure why I am today) because usually the majority of the commentaries consist of regurgitation of Entertainment Media ( disguised as news) sound bites. I also find it scary that people believe these entertainment sites and do not take the effort to check information,
thanks for restoring my confidence:)
Things I Learned August 11, 2012 at 03:10 pm
The Republicans won't let LaMar Brown pay more taxes.
cathy zmijewski August 11, 2012 at 03:15 pm
Jay Berman, I agree with you one some points.I also believe in transparency.
I think you would be surprised to know that Super PACS are outspending Unions 15 to 1 in the upcoming elections in order to to silence the unions voice giving even more power to the top 10%. Whether I agree or not on some union issues, we should not forget that they are the middle class working people, not these "all powerful" wealthy people in which they are being portrayed. That message is being encouraged/supported by the wealthy who see unions as standing in their way of complete control. IF unions were that powerful then our police, firefighters, and teachers, would be fully funded instead of seeing these horrible cuts to public safety and schools.
Jay Berman August 11, 2012 at 03:28 pm
Cathy, not sure where you are getting that 15 to 1 figure ... I do like it that huge unions like SEIU have some competition. Public service unions should never be allowed to participate in political campaigns. It is corruption, pure and simple when a union can contribute to candidates it wants who will regulate and negotiate contracts with if elected .. Look at the sorry state of cities in California, the huge pensions and paychecks ... locally, let's look at Vista Unified .. the union supports its candidates, other candidates can't come close to raising that sort of money, the union gets its candidates in - do you think for one moment that those newly elected trustees don't feel some sort of gratitude and obligation to the unions for that support ? This goes on in probably most elected districts, cities and counties.
Cuts need to be done, firefighters shouldn't be paid over $100k ... teachers get paid well, public sector workers shouldn't be compensated better than the taxpayers that support them .. they should be compensated the same way the private sector is .. We're broke, there is no more money, California cities are going bankrupt, soon, more and more will start falling like dominos .. The state is horribly mismanaged and corrupt .. it is criminal that the governor takes $388M out of highway funds to pay the debt service, annually, on this so called bullet train ..
James Alan Jones August 11, 2012 at 03:42 pm
But that is how those on the right justify the hundreds of millions that the super rich on the right have and will donate to get their way. They say that the Unions give just as much as the rich folks so no one should have a problem with it...the fact that its blatantly false and NO WAY even close to equal is besides the point.
I hope that one of these days the lower income people on the right will figure out that the rich could care less about them or their families and are only in it for the cash. If Good hearted people on the right would stop allowing themselves to be manipulated and tricked into voting against their own best interests this nation could actually start getting things done.
Mary August 11, 2012 at 04:04 pm
@LaMar & Cathy -
Thanks for adding sanity to the Patch. It sometimes seems most of the posters on this site have lost their moral turpitude. I really don’t know what it will take for the populous to understand what the repercussions will be if we don‘t band together to rid our politics of the far right. Moderation and caring for the less fortunate has always been the American Way. Willingness to support our country and the Government that allowed us all to succeed is what made us great, and until we ALL decide to participate rather than disparage the elected officials in power, we will continue to loose respect as a nation.
Jay Berman August 11, 2012 at 04:08 pm
James, how about the super rich on the left ? Here is a partial ist of them, not to mention Hollywood ... these numbers they show on this site doesn't show what they contribute 501C3s, PACs, SuperPACs etc ... George Soros supports many, many mega progressive groups ... Unions have always been huge contributors (with their members money whether they like it or not .. ) http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0812/79414.html
Jay Berman August 11, 2012 at 04:11 pm
Mary ... "Rid our politics of the far right" ?? Really ? Maybe Obama should just outlaw the republican party by executive order .... we can be like a communist country .. one party only ...
Things I Learned August 11, 2012 at 04:24 pm
Pardon me Mary I seem to have misplaced my turpitude may I borrow some of yours if you have that much to spare?
Ron Selkovitch August 11, 2012 at 07:36 pm
You confuse me, Jay. Is your remark just a joke, or is it based on some reality.
Do you think it's something that Obama would do? Would Romney be incapable of doing it?
Ron Selkovitch August 11, 2012 at 08:03 pm
TIL, we do agree, don't we, that the Tea Party will reduce the size and power of government if they can.
What do think will happen to speculative activity. Will it become more responsible? What will happen to job security? What will happen to wealth distribution? It's so easy to get into a rage about government, and attempt to destroy it. But what about the consequences? When I think about the Tea Party, I am reminded of those members who screamed with rage at the government, demanding that they keep their hands off social security and medicare.
Jay Berman August 11, 2012 at 08:59 pm
Ron, no, sadly, not a joke. I don't think even Obama would attempt to do that but is is pretty incredible the powers he has take already. Picking and choosing what laws he will use "limited resources" to enforce and what he won't enforce, he is basically making law by fiat. In our representative republic, when the legislative branch (the people, the states) pass a law and that law is signed by a president it must be enforced as written. The defense of marraige act was passed by congress and signed by a president yet by Obama's order, it will not be enforced. The welfare reform act, immigration policy, By executive order he is for all practical purposes repealing laws. The people did not want the DREAM act, it failed in congress many times yet Obama decides to pass it anyway by select enforcement and policy change .. We have 3 equal branches of government, the executive branch has ni right to basically overturn laws passed by the legislative branch .. ignoring the will of the people and the states. This Ron, is a dicator .. telling us what we will do with no representation (ignoring congress).. We are a free market capitalist country, there is no such thing as equal outcomes or wealth distribution, not here, not ever ..
Sarah Riccitelli August 13, 2012 at 11:45 pm
I think that big donors should have to publicly declare their donations. This way, they will be more careful about where they donate their money because we, the people, can approve/disapprove of them.
Meanwhile, China's state controlled/capitalistic economy is the fastest growing in the world. I'm not saying that we should become China b/c us westerners aren't ready to sanction that much state control but we need a balance. Just something to think about.
Sarah Riccitelli August 13, 2012 at 11:47 pm
Plus I deplore China's state muzzling of their citizens, preventing any free speech.
Dave Fenner August 16, 2012 at 12:29 pm
America takes care of it's own is a good statement, for anybody, anywhere. But it is NOT government that is obligated to provide nursery to grave dependence. Remember, the bigger the government, the smaller the individual. You are correct in all of your statements, but your conclusion doesn't necessarily follow. you will see that eventually, the government will run out of borrowed money, you can't spend your way into prosperity. You have a moral obligation to vote for smaller, less intrusive government, one that balances the budget and does not create dependency.
Ruby Rod August 17, 2012 at 11:52 am
Stock tip!!! Find a publicly traded television station in a swing state kids. They are bound to have a banner year!!!
TaterSalad August 27, 2012 at 07:48 pm
The President for life (he wishes), Barack Obama has high hopes to get the "Moron Vote" in his re-election bid for another 4 years! Will he succeed? There are plenty of them out there. They are liberals!
http://www.independentsentinel.com/2012/08/obama-is-winning-the-moron-vote/
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something