7055

On 2/17/2023 at 2:20 PM, iNow said:

My mistake. Read this wrong. 
 

 

That's okay, I can see how you got that impression. I do not have much knowledge or any background in politics, I am only just learning

On 2/16/2023 at 10:01 PM, npts2020 said:

The main purpose of PAC's is that you can give money to a candidate then give money to a PAC that will give it to "a" (wink, wink) candidate. Saddest part is that both Republicans and Democrats have been in control of all the branches of government since "Citizens United" but neither party seems much interested in changing this.

I think you're referring to a leadership PAC which is something I don't fully understand because if a politician did start a leadership PAC to support another politicians campaign for office, he can only give him $5,000, no? So it seems kind of fruitless

1 hour ago, iNow said:

No x2

Other than ad buys and fees for events or equipment rentals or fair grounds…. or digital media and sponsorships of content and paying people to knock on doors or get signatures or… what exactly are they teaching you in political science class if you don’t already know this?

lol, I am not and never have been in political science class my friend

19 hours ago, iNow said:

So was I, but it’s a distinction without a difference anyway. 

Correct, such as the spending that helps campaigns but isn’t directly allocated to their official funds 

So do you mean to say that through some loophole, normal PACs have always acted like Super Pacs? Can you explain further? What is the spending that helps campaigns but isn't allocated to their official funds?

24 minutes ago, iNow said:

They can, but then they become subject to the limits

 

https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/research-reports/money-politics-101-what-you-need-know-about-campaign-finance-after

 

I understand that but I was talking about PACs that aren't super PACs. Back before Super PACs came to be, what was the point of PACs? They can only give out $5,000 to a candidate campaign and you can give close to that by just contributing directly so why the need for the PAC? There must be something I'm missing here. 

1 hour ago, swansont said:

PAC donations are separate; they don’t go to the candidate’s campaign.

And above I incorrectly said election cycle, but the limits are per election - the limit applies separately to the primary and general elections

I thought PAC donations could go to a candidates campaign?

7 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

 

I was pretty sure that article did.

Perhaps you have a different and more knowledgeable background than I and what makes sense to you needs to be spelled out for me. That article did not answer the questions for me

6 minutes ago, swansont said:

Yes, you can contribute directly to a campaign. But that’s limited to $2900 per election cycle for federal office (the amount can be adjusted each election cycle; originally it was $2000 in the 2002 legislation that “reformed” the system)

https://www.fec.gov/updates/fec-announces-2021-2022-campaign-cycle-contribution-limits/

That seems so odd, there must be something I'm missing. So you can donate $2,900 to a candidate without a PAC, or you can set up a PAC and only be able to donate $2,100 more than that for a total of $5,000?

27 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

It's meant to be. A PAC is a political action committee - that is, a group of people entrusted with collecting and allocating moneys for a campaign, a candidate or a party.

Simple enough, but of course, they couldn't leave it alone. Financial manipulators can never keep things simple.

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/political-action-committee-super-pac.asp

 

That definition says it pools campaign donations from members... PACs have members? Are they like special interest groups in that way?

Can someone please answer these questions?

1) Even back before the Citizens United supreme court decision, what was the point of a PAC? If you can only raise $5,000 for a candidate that seems so small that its pointless.

2) Can someone not just give a candidate money directly? Does it have to go through a PAC?

3) Now with the introduction of Super PACs, is there even any point to having normal PACs?

4) Lets say I was running for president before the advent of Super PACs and I needed one billion dollars for my campaign. Does that mean I need two hundred thousand PACs to reach that number?

Hello, I am just learning about political science an having trouble understanding these two concepts.

On the surface its super straightforward. They are committees for the purpose of raising money for political candidates. One has spending limits and the other doesn't.

But I have to admit, this makes absolutely no sense to me whatsoever. The first confusing thing is that there exists two different ones, if a Super PAC has less strict rules than a PAC, why does a PAC even need to exist at all? The other thing that doesn't make any sense to me is that the PAC has something like a $5,000 limit on how much money it can spend on a candidate. So let me get this straight, if Bob is running for president and I want to start a PAC to support him, I can only give him $5,000? What is that going to accomplish given that the average presidential candidate has to spend over one billion dollars to win? What even makes a PAC any different then a political candidate just asking people for money directly?

The whole idea of PACs is just rife with confusion to me. Can anybody clarify?