Campaign Finance

Idiotic Campaign Finance Rule May Make You Feel Sorry for Rick Santorum

It's against the law to tell donors about certain perfectly legal donations to super PACs


Now that's some frothy shit right there.
Credit: Gage Skidmore / Foter / CC BY-SA

So here's a campaign donation regulation about which I was unaware and cannot possibly withstand a First Amendment constitutional challenge. Apparently, it is against the law for a candidate for office to suggest a donor give money to a friendly political action committee of a value that is greater than the donor could directly give the candidate. A donor can legally give more money to a PAC or a super PAC than he or she gives a candidate. But the candidate is not allowed to say so to the donor. Somebody on Rick Santorum's staff may have broken this rule, according to a complaint. Via the Washington Post:

A campaign finance watchdog has filed a complaint against former GOP presidential candidate Rick Santorum, referring to reports that Santorum or his campaign may have illegally urged a donor to donate $1 million to a super PAC supporting Santorum.

The donor, energy executive William Dore, in a recent interview said he approached Santorum about giving his campaign $1 million. He initially said Santorum urged him to instead give the money to the super PAC, Red White and Blue Fund, which can accept unlimited donations. Santorum's campaign is subject to much lower contribution limits and could not accept such a donation.

Dore later recanted, saying it was Santorum's staff who directed him to give to the super PAC.

The Campaign Legal Center, in its complaint, notes that campaign finance law allows candidates to solicit donations to super PACs, but those solicitations are subject to the same contribution limits as their campaigns. So while Santorum's campaign could tell Dore to contribute a maximum of $5,000 to the super PAC, it cannot urge him to donate $1 million to it.

This is patently absurd censorship.

NEXT: Germany's Population Drops

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Whatever keeps Santorum out of office.

  2. You know there might be a brisk business in developing ‘informative’ websites with certain key phrases. Then the answer to donor questions is Google it while I STFU.

  3. struggling to care… struggling… failing…

    But seriously… I don’t care.

    1. Could I change your mind with some salty ham tears?

      1. I have it on good authority that Santorum doesn’t taste like ham.

        1. What a crock of shit!


  4. You know, Scott, it is considered bad form to post an article about Santorum and not link to the salty ham tears thread. It saddens and disgusts me that I have to explain this to you. Of course, reason closed down the thread last year, but that doesn’t mean the internet doesn’t remember.

    1. Wouldn’t you cry if your baby doll showed up at a major event wearing the same dress as you and if Rick Santorum was your dad.

    2. Wow, never saw that thread. That picture is incredible in so many ways.

      1. You have no idea, sir. That thread was once a place of wonders.

      2. But have you ever googled santorum?

    3. highnumber’s running commentary after threading got added is kind of annoying though.

      1. Yeah, I get that he thought it would be amusing but it ruins the original thread’s flow.

        1. So many names of those who have passed beyond the rim. So many…

    4. The point where Free Republic links to that thread and Freepers start crying about what big meanies libertarians are is the moment that that thread goes from great to legendary.

      Case and point:

      Rick|11.12.06 @ 3:28PM|#
      Oh the pleasure I will take watching you sick little freaks shit, piss, and cry as you put to death for treason. Just remember who will be blamed when several American Cities are destroyed by nukes. The groundwork has already been laid, helped along by your allies in Iran, N Korea and Al-Queda, with their public statements of thanks to the democrat party. The finger of blame will be put squarely on liberal freaks like you. Why do you think that Bush isn’t that upset with the narrow loss of both houses? You have now paid your nickel to be on the Titanic as it sinks (think about it). So enjoy pounding your pud over the disappointment of an 8 year old child, I suspect that it will be nothing compared to what you will be feeling soon.

      Well said, Rick.

      1. The best part is how many of them think we’re progressive liberals.

        Joe|11.11.06 @ 7:52AM|#
        So many comments from the folks who gave us the “Mean People Suck” bumper sticker. You are such noble promoters of tolerance. Can anyone say, “hypocrite”?

        Christopher Gillibrand|11.10.06 @ 3:30PM|#
        “Suffer the little children to come unto me, and forbid them not; for of such is the kingdom of God.”

        Only lefties would be able to come up with some of the comments above. What if it was your children crying for you?

        PaulCameron is right|11.12.06 @ 4:09PM|#
        Homosexuals like Sanchez should avoid wallowing in evil publicly. It only confirms what conservatives say about their heartlessness, sadism, and utter depravity.

        If there’s one thing I’ve learned, it’s that libertarians are evil left-wing progressives when a Republican is in office and vile closet conservatives when a Democrat is in office.

        1. Dude, the 8 years of Bush made me real suspicious of this new found libertarianism on the right. Pretty much had to put up with those simpering sycophants and their ever needy warboners for about a decade. All of a sudden Obama’s president and they’re all anarchists, yeah right. And we got dumb cunts like shrike and bo calling us republicans at the same time.

          We also hear from the red apologists all this talk about how small government the “base” is and that the republican elites in NY and DC foisted these awful candidates on us. Pfffft, those quotes up there, Irish, that’s the base.

    5. whatever became of the moose?

      1. No one knows, but every so often, in the distance, I hear his call. Or it might just be my stomach grumbling. I can’t quite be sure.

    6. I was named there!

      Though it was sad to see posts from j sub d.

  5. Yeah. Its bullshit. McCain and Feingolds campaign reform which was obviously unconstitutional lasted several years before being killed off. This one will eventually be overturned as well. FYI.. there is nothing you can say to make me feel sorry for Santorum. That douchbag deserves whatever shit comes his way and more.

    1. why do you hate santorum? I have never really heard of him so i have no opinion.

  6. Dude seems to be way full of himself dont he?

    1. Holy shit, an0n-b0t wins the thread.

      1. I don’t know if it was intentional, but that was genius.

        Shut this motha’ down.

      2. Try not to act surprised…we were bound to have our Turing moment eventually.

        1. Everybody run! It’s the Singulariiii11111000101110100010011

          1. Skynet just became self-aware.

          2. Check out the big binary on Hugh!

            1. HAHA! He’s all zeros!

  7. As sorry as we should feel for Santorum, surely he’s voted for laws that are just as bad or worse?

    Karma isn’t just for us little people!

  8. Good news.
    My internet is no longer shit.
    After complaining to my ISP that I knew it wasn’t my equipment, I return home from a 4 hour absence (and not resetting anything again!) to perfectly functional internet.

    Why do they always blame my equipment first?

    1. It’ll bog down again. It always does.

  9. It’s nice to see a Rick Santorum thread about what comes out of someone’s mouth instead of what goes in.

  10. Leave it to the FEC to make Santorum sympathetic.

  11. It would take a lot more than this for me to *ever* contemplate having sympathy for Sen. Frothy.

  12. Idiotic Campaign Finance Rule May Make You Feel Sorry for Rick Santorum

    Nope. I look at this as Step 2 of 99 of Karmic Justice.

    May all of his endeavors be screwed by laws, in all likelihood, he helped enact.

  13. Surprised no one has commented on the alt-text win Scott came up with. Well played, sir.

  14. This is analogous to the rule that nonprofit orgs can’t give free advertising to for-profit ventures. It’s not censorship at all. The sole purpose of the speech in question is to get the listener to circumvent the law for the speaker’s benefit.

    I suppose it’s censorship that we prosecute people for soliciting contract murder, too?

    1. A donor can legally give more money to a PAC or a super PAC than he or she gives a candidate. But the candidate is not allowed to say so to the donor.

    2. ” It’s not censorship at all.”

      Actually, telling people what they can and cant say is censorship. That is the very definition of censorship.

      You are in full troll mode again.

  15. First Amendment case pits Christian student club against Boy Scouts (sort of) – will liberals have difficulty taking sides?

    “Yesterday Child Evangelism Fellowship filed a federal lawsuit against the Cleveland, Ohio school district alleging that an elementary school applied the school district’s fee policy in a manner that discriminated against CEF’s Christian-based Good News Clubs. The complaint (full text) in Child Evangelism Fellowship of Ohio, Inc. v. Cleveland Metropolitan School District, (ND OH, filed 8/13/2013) alleges that the school district violated CEF’s 1st and 14th Amendment rights by imposing a facilities use fee on it for use of school space for after-school meetings, but waiving the fee for the Boy Scouts. Liberty Counsel announced the filing of the lawsuit.”


  16. If this is on the record, I don’t care. If it’s off the record, I also don’t care.

  17. We had a similar asinine law in Pennsylvania regarding long term care for seniors. Senior citizens with assets below a certain amount qualified for state subsidies for nursing home care. It was perfectly legal for you to give away assets, to your children or charity or whomever, and then turn around and claim that subsidy. The state, however, made it illegal for your attorney to advise you of that fact.

    That didn’t hold up in court, but I’m not sure whether it was on pure First Amendment grounds or because it interfered with the right to counsel.

  18. Damn, Santorum gets fucked by a bill he voted against.

    Now he knows how we feel every day.

    1. Ain’t Democracy grand?

  19. He tried not to say anything, but it just seeped out.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.