A federal appeals court decided on Thursday a Federal Election Commission rule that loosens the disclosure requirements for businesses and labor groups who are paying the political ads for the coming Election Day. This comes as a major setback to groups that advocate for campaign finance reform.
Daily Mail UK reported that the regulation somehow loosens the rules on disclosing ad donors, revealing only those who contributed for the express reason of paying for the political ads. This means those who don't want to state how their funds were used can stay anonymous.
According to Trib Live, opponents of the new guidelines consider the ruling as undermining the Congress' aim to let the people know the donors behind the political ads, who are ultimately influencing the elections.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit rejected the decision from the lower court that denied the regulation in 2015. The ruling was decided during the sixth year anniversary of the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, which removed the limits on political spending by big businesses and labor unions.
Maryland Democrat Rep. Chris Van Hollen challenged the regulation back in 20. Advocacy groups like Public Citizen and Democracy 21 joined Hollen in his advocacy against the rule. According to Fred Wertheimer, the president of Democracy 21, the ruling "means the FEC can continue with flawed regulations that allow secret contributions to be laundered into federal elections in contradiction to the law."
Meanwhile, Time wrote an editorial on the need for Campaign Finance Reform, saying there are some political analysts who believes unrestricted spending brings corruption, while others believe it levels the playing field.
Campaign spending for this electoral race is expected to reach $4.4 billion by November. That is on TV political ads alone. Super Political Action Committee (PAC) and the wealthiest corporations in the country contributed massive amounts of funding to help candidates campaign for their race.
According to Time's editorial, removing campaign finance laws can only lead to more incentives for political candidates to submit to the will of individuals who gives them the biggest money during their campaign.
