On the recordSeptember 14, 1999
20 years ago in Buckley versus Valeo, the Supreme Court said, and I quote, ``To the extent that large contributions are given to secure political quid pro quos from current and potential officeholders, the integrity of our system of representative democracy is undermined. Of equal concern is the danger of actual quid pro quo arrangements and the impact of the appearance of corruption stemming from public awareness of the opportunities for abuse inherent in a regime of large individual financial contributions.'' Twenty years ago the main problem was unlimited individual contributions going for undisguised campaign ads. Today the problem is different. It is unlimited contributions from individuals and groups going for campaign ads that are disguised transparently as issue ads. So this is the real question. Will it take a Teapot Dome scandal to get action under this dome on campaign finance reform? The Annenberg study says the abuse of sham issue ads is growing.
Source
govinfo.gov




