Is Obama "Embracing" Super PACs?
EMBRACE: to take or receive gladly or eagerly; accept willingly: to embrace an idea. That seems to be the word the GOP is using to describe President Obama’s decision to accept Super PAC funds. Here are some examples: Videos of Obama condemning Super PACs…which he now embraces (PJ Tatler) Obama Embraces Citizens United: “Special Interest” […]
to take or receive gladly or eagerly; accept willingly: to embrace an idea.
That seems to be the word the GOP is using to describe President Obama’s decision to accept Super PAC funds. Here are some examples:
Videos of Obama condemning Super PACs…which he now embraces (PJ Tatler)
Obama Embraces Citizens United: “Special Interest” Money to Bankroll Campaign (Verum Serum)
Obama embraces the super PAC (Politico)
But is Obama really “embracing” the super PACs, or is he rather trying to level the playing field? Here’s what Jim Messina, Obama’s campaign manager, writes about the decision:
The President opposed the Citizens United decision. He understood that with the dramatic growth in opportunities to raise and spend unlimited special-interest money, we would see new strategies to hide it from public view. He continues to support a law to force full disclosure of all funding intended to influence our elections, a reform that was blocked in 2010 by a unanimous Republican filibuster in the U.S. Senate. And the President favors action—by constitutional amendment, if necessary—to place reasonable limits on all such spending.
But this cycle, our campaign has to face the reality of the law as it currently stands.
Over the last few months, Super PACs affiliated with Republican presidential candidates have spent more than $40 million on television and radio, almost all of it for negative ads.
This decision came out yesterday after the Koch brothers said they would dump up to $500 million to defeat Obama. Big money is what this election cycle is all about and for Obama to fight back, he needs to fight fire with fire; not embrace it, but out of necessity.
Of course the super PAC fight hasn’t been just between Democrats and Republicans. We have seen the same arguments break out in the GOP primary. Romney accuses Gingrich of using super PAC money to attack him, while denouncing the unlimited funds. In turn Gingrich does the same thing.
The point is that unlimited money in campaigns is WRONG. We are now taking the decision away from the people through the process that has governed this country for centuries and are now highly skewing it. It’s time to get the money out of politics and the best way to do that is going to 100% publicly funded campaigns. Let the candidates make their case, not corporate/big money interests.