SuperPACs, Explained (By Stephen Colbert's Lawyer) | WAMU 88.5 - American University Radio
Filed Under:

SuperPACs, Explained (By Stephen Colbert's Lawyer)

Play associated audio

Trevor Potter is a Washington lawyer with the firm Caplin and Drysdale. He also served as chair of the Federal Election Commission.

And he says Stephen Colbert is not joking.

At least when it comes to the comedian's superPAC, a political action committee authorized by the FEC to make "unlimited independent expenditures." Colbert's is called Americans For A Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

Colbert didn't get it without help. He hired Potter to submit the paperwork and coach him on his FEC hearing.

"It's not a joke," Potter tells NPR's Laura Sullivan, guest host of weekends on All Things Considered. "Because, as he has put it, he wanted to bring people in behind the curtain so they could see [superPACs] actually worked and what they actually did."

What They Actually Do

The primary purpose of superPACs and other independent groups, Potter explains, is to spend a lot of money. Mostly on TV ads.

Why they can do that has to do with last year's Supreme Court decision, Citizens United vs. Federal Election Commission.

That decision, Potter says, went something like this:

"If an individual has a constitutional right to make an independent expenditure" — meaning one not directly associated with a particular candidate or campaign — "then a group of individuals has the same right acting as a group."

This election cycle, two specific types of groups have been doing just that.

The first type, your basic superPAC, is registered with the FEC and required to disclose its donors.

"That sounds good," Potter says, "except its donors can include the X, Y, Z Corporation. Well, who is the X, Y, Z Corporation? Who knows?"

The other type includes groups that are registered as non-profits with the IRS. They aren't required to disclose any information about where their money comes from.

"It could be the car industry," Potter says. "It could be the coal industry. It could be all sorts of groups that have an ax to grind — but you won't know it."

I Want One, Too

Texas Gov. Rick Perry stands out in the Republican presidential field as perhaps the biggest superPAC magnet. At last count, he had at least three clamoring to support his bid.

But most everyone in the race has at least one superPAC in his or her corner, says Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics.

"Mitt Romney has Restore Our Future supporting his race," she says.

Ron Paul? Revolution PAC.

Jon Hunstman? Our Destiny PAC.

Michele Bachmann has two: Keep Conservatives United and Citizens For a Working America.

A superPAC supporting President Obama is no less-vaguely named. His is Priorities USA Action.

All these groups can spend unlimited amounts of money on television ads in support of their candidate — as long as they don't consult with the candidates or the campaign staff directly.

That's were things get tricky.

Revolving Door

The problem with so many of these new superPACs? Sheila Krumholz says they're not run '"independently."

"So many of these organizations are actually directed by the former top lieutenants of the candidates," she says. "While they're technically unaffiliated, there's very clearly a close connection for many of these superPACs running to support a specific candidate."

Trevor Potter points to a pro-Romney superPAC that recently accepted $1 million from a corporation few had ever heard of that had existed for about six weeks.

"It turned out to be somebody in Boston who was an old friend of Romney's, and for reasons of his own — hiding his name," Potter says.

Former FEC Chair Brad Smith says that could be a gray area, legally speaking, but it's increasingly a fact of life when it comes to running big political operations.

"There's a relatively small number of people who know how to do it, and interested in the partisan elements," he says.

Smith also says allowing more money to spent in a campaign could make things more competitive, not less.

"I think we saw that in the 2010 election," he says. "As the playing field kept expanding, as it would become apparent that somebody was vulnerable, money could get into that race and make it competitive."

More money could be the new norm, Trevor Potter says. The FEC's commissioners — three Republicans and three Democrats — are deadlocked over how to regulate campaign finance in the post-Citizens United world.

"They, at the moment, can't even have an agreement on opening a rule-making to decide what the Supreme Court did in Citizens United and decide what that decision allows and doesn't allow."

Copyright 2011 National Public Radio. To see more, visit


Infiltrating 'The Dark Net', Where Criminals, Trolls And Extremists Reign

Jamie Bartlett exposes an encrypted underworld to the Internet in his book The Dark Net: "Anybody with something to hide, whether it's for good reasons or for ill, finds a very natural home there."

Drought May Cost California's Farmers Almost $3 Billion In 2015

The state's farmers could be out $2.7 billion dollars and more than 18,000 jobs, with 564,000 acres fallowed by the end of 2015, researchers at UC Davis write in a new report.
WAMU 88.5

Virginia Lobbies DC United To Move To Loudoun County

Virginia is making a last-minute pitch to DC United to scrap its deal with the District and instead move into a new stadium in the commonwealth.

Detroit Hopes To Drive Tech Startups Away From Silicon Valley

It doesn't have a lot of high-tech companies, but the city is interested in attracting young tech entrepreneurs. Detroit's rents are far more affordable, but then there are the brutally cold winters.

Leave a Comment

Help keep the conversation civil. Please refer to our Terms of Use and Code of Conduct before posting your comments.