There are a few very good political treasurers in CA. I work with Dana Reed and Lysa Ray and John Ramirez with various clients. But my treasurer is Betty Presley and she sends email updates every time a major deadline is approaching or with any big updates in campaign finance law.
I thought this one was interesting enough to post since so many good people get into trouble with the nuances of campaign finance restrictions. (Full document attached in .pdf format below).
Federal law limits contributions to party organizations to just over $100,000 per contributor. This is a terribly stupid law. It not only restricts political speech, but it also forces political dollars into the shadows of 527s and other independent efforts not tracked as well as direct political contributions.
Some other fun facts courtesy of Betty Presley:
I. $2,300 to a candidate committee per election.
II. $5,000 per year to a non-candidate controlled Federal PAC.
III. $10,000 per year in each state to all state, district, and local political party committees within that state (subject to an overall limit of $42,700).
IV. $28,500 per year to a national political party committee.
V. A bi-annual limit of $108,200 applies to the contributions above, of which not more than $42,700 may be given to all candidates and not more than $65,500 may be given to all PACs and political parties. Of the $65,500 portion that may be contributed to political parties and PACs, only $42,700 may be contributed to state and local party committees and PACs.
July 16th, 2008 at 12:00 am
Thank you for sharing.
Though, there is nothing “stupid” about limits on donations to major party organizations. I would not for one want my party to beholden to ONE major contributor that dumps loads of money with strings attached (if any).
You cannot equate free speech with money. Does free speech allows me to “scream in a crowded theater”? Obviously common sense dicates that one should not scream in a crowded theater.
Therefore, Free Speech means as an expression of ideas from speech to the masses.
Furthermore, money means access to resources, but it does not give anyone the right to buy an election.
As for the 527 issue, if it is a problem, then Congress should repeal that portion of the Tax Code.