|
For over a decade, the frustrations that outside observers, experts and watchdogs had with the Federal Election Commission were clear: The government agency responsible for regulating money in politics and overseeing the integrity of our elections deadlocked so often — usually with a partisan split of three Republican commissioners and three Democrats — that enforcement became more of an exception than a rule. Regulations remained stagnant, and voters were left to largely fend for themselves.
But over the past two years, that pattern has changed remarkably, and for the worse: The agency that had been mired in dysfunction for so many years suddenly began issuing decisions, almost all of which are approved by a four-vote majority comprised of the three Republican commissioners and a Democratic commissioner. These decisions are drastically rolling back deeply established, longstanding limits on money in politics. The net result has been clear: In the jarring words of one current commissioner, “The deregulators are winning.”
The impact of these decisions will be felt immediately and over the long term. 2024 candidates have moved to take advantage of the FEC’s new deregulatory decisions, and these decisions — having been approved by a majority of the Commission — are likely to remain binding precedent for years to come. This will make transparency and accountability harder, and corruption easier, in our elections for the foreseeable future.
How did this massive change come about? How did the FEC go from regular deadlocks to rapid deregulation, and what can those who hope to see campaign finance laws and restraint upheld do about it?
|
