{"id":96560,"date":"2026-07-01T16:42:55","date_gmt":"2026-07-01T16:42:55","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/porter-supreme-courts-campaign-finance-ruling-reduces-hypocrisy-and-brings-political-money-back-into-the-open\/"},"modified":"2026-07-01T16:42:55","modified_gmt":"2026-07-01T16:42:55","slug":"porter-supreme-courts-campaign-finance-ruling-reduces-hypocrisy-and-brings-political-money-back-into-the-open","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/porter-supreme-courts-campaign-finance-ruling-reduces-hypocrisy-and-brings-political-money-back-into-the-open\/","title":{"rendered":"Porter: Supreme Court’s Campaign Finance Ruling Reduces Hypocrisy and Brings Political Money Back Into the Open"},"content":{"rendered":"

Richard Porter broke down what the Supreme Court’s decision in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission<\/a>, Tuesday on the RCP Podcast. He argues that loosening limits on spending by political parties will actually make elections more transparent and strengthen independent, self-funded candidates, while taking influence away from PACs and other “dark money” groups. “I do think it takes some of the hypocrisy out of the process,” Porter said about groups having to hide coordination to get around these laws. “That always struck me as bizarre. You have a country with a First Amendment, and somehow we have all these rules where I’ve got to call up a lawyer and figure out, can I give money to this, or talk to them?” “I actually think this entire architecture of rules is unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court is taking it apart piece by piece by piece,” he said. “The last piece will be the limits on individual contributions, which the court upheld on the basis of the problem of the appearance of corruption.” “It has always struck me as bizarre. You have a country with a First Amendment, freedom of speech, freedom of association, freedom to petition your government, and somehow we have all these rules where I’ve got to call up a lawyer and figure out, can I give money to this, can I talk to them?” he said. “But that’s sort of nuts.” “I actually think this entire architecture of rules is unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court is taking it apart piece by piece by piece,” Porter said. “That will be the last vestige of all these Watergate reforms that were passed,” Cannon added. “One by one, they’ve been either ignored by the parties, changed by Congress, or thrown out by the courts. That individual contribution, as far as I know, is the last sort of major thing that the Watergate Congress passed.” “The limits on how much you can give to the party, for example, are where the super PACs come from. It seems to me that the next step should be to eliminate the limits on how much a party can raise from an individual,” said Porter. “I just feel like there’s this collection of laws which are inconsistent and vague… It’s irrational, and it’s for show.” “The idea that you’re taking money out of politics is ridiculous. Money is the mother’s milk of politics,” he said. “So the idea somehow we’re going to take the milk away, but it’s going to come in through a side door, and you can’t really drink it except on Tuesdays after 4:00 – it’s all sort of nuts. “What we want is we want to know who’s delivering the milk,” Tom Bevan chimed in. “Correct,” said Porter. “So these dark money groups where you can’t see who’s contributing what to where is something that – more transparency is always better. What it’s done is it’s pushed money, instead of being out in the open through the parties where there’s disclosure, into these super PACs.” “So the 501(c)(3) organizing ‘No Kings’ protests, that’s tax-exempt money and we don’t know who’s funding that,” he explained. “It’d be much more straightforward to have the Democratic Party organizing these events. You would see who’s giving money to the Democratic Party to organize these things, and then you can make judgments based on that.”
\nRealClearPolitics Videos<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Richard Porter broke down what the Supreme Court’s decision in National Republican Senatorial Committee v. Federal Election Commission, Tuesday on the RCP Podcast. He argues that loosening limits on spending by political parties will actually make elections more transparent and strengthen independent, self-funded candidates, while taking influence away from PACs and other “dark money” groups. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[4],"tags":[11640,8878,541,2469,4610,10813,8986,62,1949,676,4525,15588,10209,6352],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96560"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=96560"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/96560\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=96560"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=96560"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fallsurfing.net\/firstnews\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=96560"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}