 |
Hello:
Ok, that's no so.. Or, I don't KNOW if it's so.. But it COULD be!
Given that corporations can give unlimited amounts of money - or better said - given that PAC'S can TAKE unlimited amounts of money, and don't have to disclose WHO'S giving it to them, WHY wouldn't Iran try to change our policy from the INSIDE?? What makes you think they're NOT?
excon
The ProhibitionQuote:
Originally Posted by excon
The Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) prohibits any foreign national from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly. It is also unlawful to help foreign nationals violate that ban or to solicit, receive or accept contributions or donations from them. Persons who knowingly and willfully engage in these activities may be subject to fines and/or imprisonment.
Who is a Foreign National?
The following groups and individuals are considered "foreign nationals" and are, therefore, subject to the prohibition:
•Foreign governments;
•Foreign political parties;
•Foreign corporations;
•Foreign associations;
•Foreign partnerships;
•Individuals with foreign citizenship; and
•Immigrants who do not have a "green card."
http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/foreign.shtml#Prohibition
Domestic Subsidiaries and Foreign-Owned Corporations
A U.S. subsidiary of a foreign corporation or a U.S. corporation that is owned by foreign nationals may be subject to the prohibition, as discussed below.
PAC Contributions for Federal Activity
A domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation may not establish a federal political action committee (PAC) to make federal contributions if:
1.The foreign parent corporation finances the PAC's establishment, administration, or solicitation costs; or
2.Individual foreign nationals:
◦Participate in the operation of the PAC;
◦Serve as officers of the PAC;
◦Participated in the selection of persons who operate the PAC; or
◦Make decisions regarding PAC contributions or expenditure. 11 CFR 110.20(I).
(See also AOs 2000-17, 1995-15, 1990-8, 1989-29, and 1989-20.)
Corporate Contributions for Nonfederal Activity
Additionally, a domestic subsidiary of a foreign corporation (or a domestic corporation owned by foreign nationals) may not donate funds or anything of value in connection with state or local elections if:
1.These activities are financed by the foreign parent or owner; or
2.Individual foreign nationals are involved in any way in the making of donations to nonfederal candidates and committees.[1]
Please note that many states place additional restrictions on donations made to nonfederal candidates and committees. 11 CFR 110.20(I). (See also AOs 1992-16, 1985-3, 1982-10, and Matter Under Review (MUR) 2892.)
Under Commission regulations it is unlawful to knowingly provide substantial assistance to foreign nationals making contributions or donations in connection with any U.S. election. 11 CFR 110.20(h). "Substantial assistance" refers to active involvement in the solicitation, making, receipt or acceptance of a foreign national contribution or donation with the intent of facilitating the successful completion of the transaction. This prohibition includes, but is not limited to individuals who act as conduits or intermediaries. 67 FR 69945-6 (November 19, 2002) [PDF].
Soliciting, Accepting, or Receiving Contributions and Donations from Foreign Nationals
As noted earlier, the Act prohibits knowingly soliciting, accepting or receiving contributions or donations from foreign nationals. In this context, "knowingly" means that a person:
•Has actual knowledge that the funds solicited, accepted, or received are from a foreign national;
•Is aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to believe that the funds solicited, accepted, or received are likely to be from a foreign national;
•Is aware of facts that would lead a reasonable person to inquire whether the source of the funds solicited, accepted or received is a foreign national.
11 CFR 110.20(a)(4)(I), (ii) and (iii).
Pertinent facts that may lead to inquiry by the recipient include, but are not limited to the following: A donor or contributor uses a foreign passport, provides a foreign address,
makes a contribution from a foreign bank, or resides abroad. Obtaining a copy of a current and valid U.S. passport would satisfy the duty to inquire whether the funds solicited, accepted, or received are from a foreign national. 11 CFR 110.20(a)(7).
Monitoring Prohibited Contributions
When a federal political committee (a committee active in federal elections) receives a contribution it believes may be from a foreign national, it must:
•Return the contribution to the donor without depositing it; or
•Deposit the contribution and take steps to determine its legality, as described below.
Either action must be taken within 10 days of the treasurer's receipt. 11 CFR 103.3(b)(1).
If the committee decides to deposit the contribution, the treasurer must make sure that the funds are not spent because they may have to be refunded. Additionally, he or she must maintain a written record explaining why the contribution may be prohibited.[4] 11 CFR 103.3(b)(4) and (5). The legality of the contribution must be confirmed within 30 days of the treasurer's receipt, or the committee must issue a refund.[5]
If the committee deposits a contribution that appears to be legal, but later discovers that the deposited contribution is from a foreign national, it must refund the contribution within 30 days of making the discovery. If a committee lacks sufficient funds to make a refund when a prohibited contribution is discovered, it must use the next funds it receives. 11 CFR 103.3(b)(1) and (2).
In short ;'Citizens United 'did NOT open the door to foreign contributions.
Hello again, tom:
Well then, since it's against the law, I shouldn't worry. I'm SURE Kim Jun Un respects our law.
Bwa, ha ha ha.
excon
But then now many Corporations that do business in other nations may not agree to funnel money though, They charge a few dollras higher on a item make a larger profit and then donate to a political party.
The issue would be finding it and proving it.
Yes indeed... tough to prove .As tough to prove as the contention that thousands of "individual checks written to the Obama campaign in 2008 ,through his internet campaign,originated from overseas from foreign sources. The Obama campaign had turned off its Address Verification System at its Web site.(The FEC declined to pursue any charges after it expressed concern that the list might include thousands of other Obama donors it suspected of contributing illegally from foreign countries. )
As tough to prove as the contention that Al Gore was shmoozing with Tibetans and Chinese ,and swapping military secrets for campaign contributions in 2006 .
1996 United States campaign finance controversy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
And as tough to prove that in this election ;the funds the President's campaign is actively soliciting from overseas will not be from foreign sources .
Obama looks overseas for campaign cash | Times 247
Hello again, tom:Quote:
Originally Posted by tomder55
So, if Obama can raise foreign money, which might BE North Korean money, or even worse, European money, you'd be FOR reforming it, wouldn't you? What did Romney say, "What's sauce for the goose, is sauce for the gander"?
excon
I for one think that disclosure laws for campaign contributions would not violate the 1st amendment .
There is nothing like a beatup is there. No evidence just load noise.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:57 AM. |