Top Obama Donors Gave $100,000

January 18th, 2009 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

The Washington Post reported Sunday that Obama’s top donors gave more than $100,000 to his campaign by giving to various entities working to get Obama elected. The report is more evidence that campaign financing laws are not effective in preventing big money from playing a key role in politics.

Although the goal of campaign financing laws can count on general support, the laws themselves cannot. Especially conservatives complain that these laws are in breach with the first amendment guaranteeing the freedom of speech.

Ironically, liberals supported the campaign finance reforms Obama and his top donors circumvented successfully last year. Liberals argued for years that Big Money had too much influence. They favored laws that would limit the amount an individual could give to one candidate.

Not only did these donors circumvent campaign finance laws, the WaPo adds that Team Obama new about it and actively used these donors to receive more. He turned to these top-donors ‘repeatedly [...] in financing his campaign, transition and inauguration,’ the article says.

Approximately 100 families and individuals are involved. They donated at least $100,000 each to Obama’s campaign and separate committees ‘independently’ working for an Obama victory. ‘The families gave to as many as five committees, records show, and 27 of the 94 families also bundled money from others, collecting millions of dollars on top of their personal donations.’

‘Among the supporters were well-known families such as the Rockefellers, as well as lesser-known backers such as New Yorker Frank Brosens, a leader in the hedge fund industry, who raised $500,000 for Obama’s campaign and inauguration in addition to the $182,000 he gave with his wife, parents and three sons.’

Although there is certainly nothing wrong with donating to a cause one believes in, the records show that campaign financing laws are ineffective. Clever and savvy rich individuals are able to circumvent the law and can give hundreds of thousands of dollars nonetheless; directly and indirectly.

Campaign finance laws have been disastrous. They add little to nothing; yet, they infringe on individuals’ right to the freedom of speech. The article shows that abolishing these laws is the best way forward; that way, the playing field will be leveled once again and it will simplify oversight of campaigns.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Michael Merritt
    January 18th, 2009 at 22:51
    Reply | Quote | #1

    FYI: Free speech is the first amendment.

    But I do agree, the loopholes need to be closed.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.