THE BLOG
06/17/2012 11:46 am ET Updated Aug 17, 2012

Bad Laws Make Bad Politics

As we near the presidential election do you really know how presidential politics is funded? I'm betting it will shock you.

Our political system is all messed up. I won't even couch that with an "allegedly" or a "reportedly" -- it is just a mess and our federal election laws are a joke.

You want to know exactly where a candidate has gotten money to stage their expensive campaign? I sure do. I want to know what organizations or powerful people a candidate might feel beholden to once they take office. But the way the campaign finance laws are written that vital information is easily kept secret.

Realize as you read this that the election campaign laws were written and passed by members of the U.S. Congress -- the very people who would most frequently be held accountable to them. No wonder it's such a muddle.

I admit up front that I am not an expert. But after attending every day of the recent John Edwards political corruption trial I got an eye-opening crash course in how ridiculous, complicated and full of loopholes our elections laws are. Trying to explain it is like trying to summarize the Internal Revenue Service code.

(In case you missed it Edwards was found not guilty of one count of accepting an illegal campaign contribution and a mistrial was declared on five related counts.)

I always thought the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) kept track of all the money that flowed to and from a politician running for office. I was wrong. Under the law the FEC can only police some of the contributions -- specifically those that go directly into the politician's official campaign office.

Under law no person can give a candidate's campaign more than $5,000 a year and the FEC makes public a list of all these donations. But, the ugly truth is: the vast majority of money that goes to help a politician never passes through their campaign office. And it is all legal.

Is it ethical? That's for you to decide.

Here's how it works: Let's take the hypothetical case of a U.S. senator we'll call Sam Smith. He decides he wants to run for president on a platform that America should be a more hopeful country, where everyone gets a college education and a job. Even before Smith officially declares his candidacy he and his pals set up non-profit organizations with fancy names like "The Center for Hope and Justice," "The College for Everyone Fund," or the "We're All in It Together Foundation." They start fundraising and the money rolls in to these so-called "527 organizations" (named for a section in the tax code) or "Political Action Committees" (PACs). Using these entities millions of dollars is funneled in from people, unions, and corporations. Much of the time no public reporting is required so voters can't tell where the big money behind their candidate came from. It feels like legalized bribery to me.

Once these political pirates have their 527 or PAC money they can buy unlimited advertising to promote their favorite candidate. They can declare on television or radio, in newspapers or on billboards, "Sam Smith supports free college tuition for everyone just like we do!" or they can buy a :30 second TV commercial and fill it with nothing but pictures of Smith, his handsome family, cute puppy dogs and a final graphic that reads, "What A Great American!" The only restriction on the 527s or PACs is they cannot use the magic phrase, "Vote for Sam Smith."

What a scam -- and, realize, these groups will also use their millions to buy vicious attack ads against Smith's opponent. Now, the candidate will slyly tell you they have nothing to do with those attacks and no control over what others do. The pol might scrape their toe in the dirt, shrug and look a tad embarrassed as they explain that they are humbled and grateful that an outside group is buying advertising that just happens to promote the same issues that are near and dear to their heart.

Don't be fooled. Now you know how it works. These 527 and PAC groups are usually birthed by campaign strategists as a way to get around FEC rules. And it's done with a wink and a nod from all involved.

But, wait. Maybe Smith is a great candidate and he really does deserve our vote. Isn't there a better, more transparent way for him to get the money he needs to run for office while preserving the voters right to know where the heck the money is really coming from?

You bet there is. First, take the thousands of pages of FEC regulations and make a big bonfire out of them! Then, write a one-page set of simple guidelines that every candidate in every political contest in America must adhere to. That page will say, in effect, that whatever money comes in to a person running for office must be reported to the public every calendar quarter. Every dollar that goes out must also be accounted for and appear on an easy-to-access report posted on the internet. Every supporter's gift -- from free office space and airplane rides to silent auction items or a celebrity chef hired to cook at a fundraiser -- everything must be posted for voter's inspection.

That's the only true path to transparency. So, do I hear any politicians embracing this idea?


Diane Dimond may be reached through her web site: www.dianedimond.com. Her latest book,
Cirque Du Salahi: The Inside and Untold Story of the So-Called White House Gate Crashers, is available through Amazon.com.

Subscribe to Breaking Alerts.
Don’t miss out — be the first to know all the latest news.