Are Super PACS That Super?

In the wake of Scott Walker and Rick Perry’s departures, Yoni Appelbaum asks “why couldn’t their billionaire backers keep their campaigns alive?”

“Super PACS, which are nominally independent, seemed an appealing solution to many candidates … A single donor can, with the stroke of a pen, write a check for more than a candidate has raised in his entire campaign.”

“But it turns out that there are some things that Super PACs can’t do. Hard money can pay for the full gamut of campaign expenses, from hiring staff to purchasing printer toner to putting ads up on television. Super PACs can pay for television ads, but they can’t pay for campaign staff.”

“There’s another price candidates have paid for their reliance on Super PACs. Candidates want their most trusted advisors in charge of these nominally independent entities, to ensure that they serve their interests. But once they take the helm of a Super PAC, they’re legally barred from offering the trusted counsel and honest feedback that earned them their positions.”


  1. Until they figure out how to clone Reagans in tanks, they will always be somewhat limited in their effectiveness by the solid-clay feet of their mortal tools.

    I’m sure they’re working on it. My guess is that Nancy won’t agree to sharing the DNA. 😉

  2. “Legally barred.” Right. Walker was investigated for doing exactly that, and got away with it.
    PROVING it is almost impossible.

Comments are closed.