Republicans Protect Secret Donations as ‘Private Civic Engagement’
Do conservatives deserve blame or credit for protecting dark money in American politics?
How Republicans Protect Secret Donors
“New York Times [has] another great editorial about dark money and the influence of money in politics. President Obama wants to address a part of the problem, but of course the Republicans are fighting him.” — The Young Turks
Here are links to the resources that are referenced in the video.
Dark Money’s Deepening Power – The Editorial Board, The New York Times
Wolf-PAC – Fighting for free and fair elections in America
The Other Side of Dark Money, or ‘Private Civic Engagement’
Here is the defense for protecting dark money. It is provided by The Heartland Institute, a political policy ‘think tank’ that has ties to the Koch Brothers and the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).
“Being able to speak freely and donate money anonymously has a long and distinguished history in the U.S. The Declaration of Independence, the campaigns for approval of the U.S. Constitution and the end of slavery, and the modern civil rights movement all relied for their success on the right to keep private the identities of persons expressing their opinions or financing unpopular causes.” — Nick Dranias, The Heartland Institute
On the surface, the argument that dark money supports ‘unpopular’ (yet worthy) issues like civil rights, sounds honorable and logical. This is the kind of superficial ‘blip’ that your nice, average conservative citizen hears… and accepts.
So, if we were to go below the surface a teeny bit, what kind of rebuttal might you make to the idea that dark money serves to protect freedom? Try to keep your answers to short ‘blips.’ (That’s all we can handle!) I’ll go first…
- Dark money is just as likely to support unpopular and NOT so worthy causes (i.e., climate denial).
… now it’s your turn. (Add your ‘blips’ and deeper thoughts to the comment section below.)