A question on federal election law
Sarah Jessica Parker became a superstar and a cultural icon by starring in a TV series that celebrated four female characters who behaved like whores and that encouraged a whole generation of girls and women to behave like whores. This is what liberal society honors and considers admirable. So admirable is Parker, by liberal lights, that a fundraising dinner is being held for President Obama this evening in her Greenwich Village townhouse.
But that was just my introduction. Here’s my point. The guests at this dinner are paying $80,000 a head. Sorry for my ignorance of U.S. election law, but isn’t the limit that a person can donate to a political candidate something like $2,300? How then can donors give Obama $80,000 each?
I don’t think President Obama is receiving federal election monies.Paul K. writes:
According to a recent New York Times article, D. Edwards is correct: “This year will be the first since Richard Nixon’s day that neither major candidate will accept public financing. Both Mitt Romney and President Obama plan to raise hundreds of millions of dollars, far more than they could get from the public system.”Timothy A. writes:
That is a good question. Obama not accepting federal campaign financing only frees him up to spend an unlimited amount of money. It doesn’t remove the $2,500 limit that individuals can give to a single campaign. I can only speculate that some of that $80,000 per plate is going to the Democratic National Committee (the limit to those contributions is $30,800 per individual according to Wikipedia) or perhaps to an “unaffiliated” super PAC, where there is no limit.Paul Nachman writes:
D. Edwards’s answer to your query isn’t relevant. Here’s the rule:June 17
Gilda A. writes:
I don’t understand why conservatives aren’t hitting the O campaign every day for disabling credit-card verification for website donations (as they did in 2008).
Posted by Lawrence Auster at June 14, 2012 06:43 PM | Send