How can Mitt and Obama legally hold $75,000 per couple fundraisers???

[devil21]

I was just watching a segment on Mitt's recent fundraising event for rich folks in the Hamptons. Couples were charged $75,000 to attend. Mitt was there and gave a speech and glad handed and all that so it was a campaign event, not a superPAC event, since the candidate can't have any direct connections to superPACs.

So my question is this. Aren't donors limited to $2500 per person for the general election by FEC law? Even if Mitt or Obama, who also holds these high dollar fundraisers so the question applies to him as well, were soliticiting for primary and general election donations, a couple would still be legally limited to $10,000 total donations per election cycle. So how can Mitt legally charge $75,000 for two people?? Seems to me that's flagrant FEC law breaking right out in the open. Or am I missing something here?

[tsai3904]

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contriblimits.shtml

One person can give up to $5,000 to a candidate's campaign and up to $30,800 to a national party committee.

[Anti Federalist]

http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/contriblimits.shtml

One person can give up to $5,000 to a candidate's campaign and up to $30,800 to a national party committee.

And the remainder $3400 is for "overhead".

[devil21]

That clears up much of my confusion, however $75,000 is higher than that allowable amount. 30800x2=61600 5000x2=10000 61600+10000=71600.

Was there any way we could have taken advantage of that? I didn't know about the $30k to a party committee part. I guess we could have donated that amount to the RNC but that would have been pointless for obvious reasons. Seems like just another part of the rigged game. If the party committee doesn't support your candidate then you're kneecapped on the financial side too.

[angelatc]

I was just watching a segment on Mitt's recent fundraising event for rich folks in the Hamptons. Couples were charged $75,000 to attend. Mitt was there and gave a speech and glad handed and all that so it was a campaign event, not a superPAC event, since the candidate can't have any direct connections to superPACs.

There is no FEC law prohibiting candidates from having associations with their Super PACs. Mitt frequently raises money for his Super PAC. Essentially the only restriction is the campaign can't discuss strategy - ie, tell the PAC what the money is to be used for, or what messages they should produce.

[Anti Federalist]

There is no FEC law prohibiting candidates from having associations with their Super PACs. Mitt frequently raises money for his Super PAC. Essentially the only restriction is the campaign can't discuss strategy - ie, tell the PAC what the money is to be used for, or what messages they should produce.

Yes, this too.

[devil21]

There is no FEC law prohibiting candidates from having associations with their Super PACs. Mitt frequently raises money for his Super PAC. Essentially the only restriction is the campaign can't discuss strategy - ie, tell the PAC what the money is to be used for, or what messages they should produce.

So the candidate can show up and speak and schmooze at a super PAC fundraiser? Did Ron ever do this?? Now Im feeling like we really missed out on some opportunities to raise more money this past election cycle, particularly on the super PAC side. Not that it was spent all that well already but still...

[AJ Antimony]

Now Im feeling like we really missed out on some opportunities to raise more money this past election cycle, particularly on the super PAC side.

Nah, don't worry about it. When Romney goes to an in-person fundraiser, the guests in attendance are all millionaires who are there to donate thousands of dollars if not more. When Ron goes to an in-person fundraiser, the guests in attendance are all normal Americans who donate maybe a couple hundred dollars, and that's assuming they aren't hardcore supporters who are already maxed. If you have a big Ron Paul donor who wants to donate 5 figures, they will find a way to donate it. The max will go to the campaign, and the rest will go to Ron Paul superPACs. I'm sure big Ron Paul donors are heavily advised not to write a check to the RNC.

[nano1895]

>paying money to go see Mitt Romney talk
>whatisthisidonteven.jpg

[RonRules]

The extra $3400 is for the food for two people.

It's all good.

[angelatc]

So the candidate can show up and speak and schmooze at a super PAC fundraiser? Did Ron ever do this?? Now Im feeling like we really missed out on some opportunities to raise more money this past election cycle, particularly on the super PAC side. Not that it was spent all that well already but still...

No, because Jessie Benton would never mingle with the mundanes. He prefers to keep his cash cow up on a pedestal.

I have no issues with how the Revolution Super PAC spent money. Their commercials were awesome. The Utah Super PAC, the one that spend all their money on Google ads though - I thought that was a waste. But it's their money - if it had worked we'd be heralding their genius. High risk, high reward, all that.

But most super PACs are run by former campaign insiders, while Revolution PAC is definitely run by the grassroots. Jessie wanted nothing to do with the untouchables.

[thoughtomator]

it's only illegal if someone actually enforces the law

[Lucille]

>paying money to go see Mitt Romney talk
>whatisthisidonteven.jpg

Right? What a waste of money!

[tangent4ronpaul]

What about their going to Europe to do these fundraisers?

Foreign Nationals are not supposed to be able to donate to US elections. I remember Hillary Clinton getting huge donations from China last cycle too.

-t