John Boehner: Obama Super PAC Decision 'Just Another Broken Promise'

WASHINGTON, DC - FEBRUARY 2: House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) holds his weekly on-camera press news conference on Capitol Hill February 2, 2012 in Washington, DC. (Photo by Pete Marovich/Getty Images)

Hours after President Barack Obama's campaign decided to soften its stance toward super PACs, House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) slammed the decision.

At a Tuesday news conference, Boehner was asked for his comment regarding the president's reversal.

"Just another broken promise," he said.

On Monday evening, Obama's re-election team announced its backing of Priorities USA, a super PAC run by former Obama aides. Obama has traditionally been a fervent opponent toward the organizations, dating back to the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission Supreme Court decision that spearheaded their creation.

Obama Campaign Manager Jim Messina explained the decision, alluding to the millions of dollars spent by organizations supporting GOP presidential candidates. Via Obama 2012's official website:

With so much at stake, we can't allow for two sets of rules in this election whereby the Republican nominee is the beneficiary of unlimited spending and Democrats unilaterally disarm.

Therefore, the campaign has decided to do what we can, consistent with the law, to support Priorities USA in its effort to counter the weight of the GOP Super PAC. We will do so only in the knowledge and with the expectation that all of its donations will be fully disclosed as required by law to the Federal Election Commission.

In a Tuesday morning conference call, more details emerged about the change of political heart. Outside of millions of dollars flooding into GOP super PACs, another factor was the $500 million fundraising goal set by Crossroads groups and the Koch Brothers.

While Boehner was critical of Obama's decision, he's historically been against limitations on campaign fundraising. After the Supreme Court rolled back campaign finance restrictions in the landmark Citizens United case, Boehner called the decision "a big win for the First Amendment."

"Let the American people decide how much money is enough," Boehner said, according to NPR.

A few months later, when Democrats turned to the DISCLOSE Act to increase transparency among private groups investing in elections, Boehner expressed his opposition.

"Freedom of speech is the basis of our democracy," he said in a press release on the day that the House passed the bill. "The purpose of this bill, plain and simple, is to allow Democrats to use their Majority in this House to silence their political opponents. This is a backroom deal to shred our Constitution for raw, ugly, partisan gain."

The DISCLOSE Act fell by one vote in the Senate, which then-White House senior adviser and current Obama political adviser David Axelrod called a "significant" blow.

From the Democratic side of the aisle, Monday's Obama decision did not sit well with former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.). A heavy proponent of campaign finance laws, Feingold opposed the campaign's support of super PACs, telling The Huffington Post that "it is a dumb approach." Feingold proceeded to question how the move affects Democrats across the board.

"I also think it guts the president's message and the Democratic Party's message," Feingold said. "We are doing very well right now. The president is doing brilliantly. This is no time to blunt that message by starting to play this game."

Related on HuffPost:

 

 

Comments

[lvdragonlady]

05:23 AM on 02/15/2012

Sorry John but since the GOP plays without rules, Obama can do the same.

[1088]

06:39 PM on 02/09/2012

WHERE ARE THE JOBS YOU PROMISED, WHERE?

[nvsand]

04:26 PM on 02/08/2012

Did Boehner cry when he heard that President Obama was open to a SuperPac?

[posie Di Sesa]

11:47 AM on 02/08/2012

that's right, john, because your promise of jobs jobs jobs was never meant to be taken as a factual statement. with your 'job creators' spending millions on a possibly winning primary candidate, taxing them a small portion of their income would destroy the recovery. please explain your fake laser-like focus and the willingness of corporate leaders to spend freely on nothing that helps the country, only their own, and your, interests.

john, please stop being so negative; it didn't work for romney -- 99% negative ads with not a one saying how he should be president and solve our problems -- and it won't work for you as long as you work for the 1%, again like former governor romney. former might even be in your future unless you start to do something positive.

[RJROW]

01:34 PM on 02/15/2012

Is is nice to hear voices of reason, one that actually gets it. We all know that politicans have "big business" in their back pockets, the question that really matters is which party works with the interest of us 99%ers in mind. When you cut through all the "rhetroic" the answer is obvious, it is the Democratic party.

The Republicans love to tell the un-educated that their freedoms are at stake; guns, religion, choice, etc... and they use fear to rally support around an agenda that is antiquated, serving only those that live in the land of wealth. I mean really, they are anti regulation, anti gay, anti government, and they sell their constituency on the notion that "bib business" well solve all of our problems. Get of of their backs and watch them create good jobs, and the money will trickle down to the bottom they say. Sorry folks, it doesn't work, unless you are in that top percentile, then it makes all the sense in the world.

[Jeffrey Leathem]

10:35 AM on 02/08/2012

Boehner is once again living in rhetorical fantasyland. Most of the promises he's "broken" are the ones most distant from the conservative middle, and Boehner knows it. But because he's preaching to the uniformed and undereducated who won't bother to call him out on his lies or check his facts, the rhetoric can be quite effective.
Dems have to find a way to master to the soundbite like their rivals have, because once they do, I think we'll have a different type of political discourse based in reason and thoughtfulness rather than antagonism and partisanship.

[nitwitsRus]

07:09 AM on 02/08/2012

guess Obama figured
Hay!
if Stephe can do it?

[nitwitsRus]

07:07 AM on 02/08/2012

& we Republicans were
COUNTING n him'
to KEEP that promise!

[Shelby596]

08:53 PM on 02/07/2012

Boehner has ZERO class. I know he wants Obama to be an id.iot and sit back and let the Koch brothers buy the election, but fortunately, he's not as stup.id as they want him to be. It's not Obama's fault that this nightmare of a conservative Supreme Court ruled that the richest in the country can buy our elections, but he's not going to allow them to buy the country, then ruin it. NOT GOING TO HAPPEN!!!

[saortolani]

08:16 PM on 02/07/2012

Johnny Johnny Johnny.
When will you learn you just cannot have it both ways.
Thank Dubbya for the SuperPAC debacle. And thank the GOP candidates for president for taking a bad idea and making it infinitely worse.

[rickymsmith]

08:15 PM on 02/07/2012

Blah.... Blah... Blah....

[knewsreply]

07:26 PM on 02/07/2012

Another Hypocritical and "Cheap Shot" of the President is sent from Boehner.

[denmak]

06:44 PM on 02/07/2012

Crybaby! :P

[MelanieMatthias]

06:34 PM on 02/07/2012

I can't wait till I don't have to see this dru_ks face or hear his voice! Hurry November!

[argved]

06:31 PM on 02/07/2012

Gee if I didn't know better I might think that Boehner was being a tad disingenuous.

[Shelby596]

08:53 PM on 02/07/2012

Imagine that.

[RC Hindle]

06:30 PM on 02/07/2012

Boehner, you might as well be made of cellophane, you're so easy to see through. If BO does not make use of PAC's he will certainly have problems dealing with the Rove/Koch funded attack ads that will surely come out for the general election. If he does use that money, you call it a broken promise. Nothing he does will ever be good enough for you.

Solution? You lose your job.

Yeah, that's the ticket.