Mitt Romney: Super PACs are a "disaster"

 

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney on Tuesday blasted the influence of so-called super PACs in contemporary politics, calling the "new entities" a "disaster" and claiming that campaign finance laws have "made a mockery of our political campaign season."

"This is a strange thing in these campaign finance laws," Romney said in an appearance on MSNBC's "Morning Joe." "They set up these new entities, which I think is a disaster, by the way. Campaign finance law has made a mockery of our political campaign season."

He added: "We really ought to let campaigns raise the money they need and just get rid of these super PACs."

Super PACs can spend unlimited funds to support a candidate as long as they do not directly coordinate with the candidate's campaign. And as CBS' Phil Hirschkorn reported earlier this month, they could drive campaign spending by independent groups up to $1 billion dollars in the 2012 election cycle - in addition to an estimated $4 billion in expenditures by presidential candidates, congressional candidates and political parties.

Romney indirectly benefits from the Super PAC "Restore Our Future," which has in recent weeks directed a series of negative ads at fellow Republican frontrunner Newt Gingrich - most recently one targeting the former House speaker for allegedly having "more baggage than the airlines."

When asked if he would concede to Gingrich's recent demands that the super PAC pull the ad, Romney pointed out that that would be in violation of campaign finance regulations.

"It's illegal, as you probably know," he said.

"Super PACs have to be entirely separate from a campaign and a candidate. I'm not allowed to communicate with a super PAC in any way, shape or form," he said.

"If we coordinate in any way whatsoever, we go to the big house," he added.

In a press availability on Monday, Gingrich suggested the assumption - based on legal restrictions - that candidates have nothing to do with the content super PACs produce on behalf of the candidates they represent is false.

"They ought to take this junk off the air," Gingrich told reporters, referring to negative ads. "And don't hide behind some baloney about, this 'super PAC that I actually have no control over that happens to be run by five of my former staff.' That's just baloney."

On Tuesday, a new pro-Gingrich super PAC called "Winning Our Future" announced that former Gingrich aide Rick Tyler would be joining the super PAC as a senior advisor.

On MSNBC, Romney also defended his controversial health care law - which he passed into law as governor of Massachusetts - and attributed the idea of an individual mandate to his opponent.

"Actually, the idea of an individual mandate came from Newt Gingrich and the Heritage Foundation," Romney said. "And we did something different than what they proposed. They were talking about a federal mandate, which is of course what Barack Obama did."

Romney maintained that he has always opposed the federal mandate, and that the plan he crafted was based on the needs of his constituents in the state.

"I opposed the idea of a federal mandate from the very beginning and said no, we will craft a plan that works for our own state and other states can learn from it or can decide to take a different course," he continued. "But yes, he had a federal mandate in the history and only recently has changed his view on that."

[jimbom121]

Mitt "corporations are people" is now suddenly against SuperPacs? Wasn't he the first GOP candidate to have one?

So will Romney start campaigning for the repeal of Citizens United?

[gadfly65]

Whatever - Republicans have thwarted campaign finance reform because big money is mostly on their side. He talks big now but if he were elected he'd weasel his way out of doing anything.

[superdem1]

Amazing that these Republicans are against all this corrupting money in politics - unlimited money with no record who it comes from - they voted for the laws that allow it, and they voted in the politicians who nominated the corrupt Supreme Court justices who allowed it - hey MITT, remember corporations are PEOPLE ? You just don't like all that money buying ads against YOU. Once it's being spent against President Obama, you'd be just fine with it, supposing you are the Republican nominee.

[ladyang]

yeah mitt, super pacs are terrible until they further his political well being! Wait until next week, he'll say just the opposite - I love Super Pacs and all they have done for me! MR FLIP FLOP at his best!!!!

[tomford429]

Whether they get the money though PAC's, University conduits, or under the table - they still get the money that clearly buys influence. Campaign funds, including those large donations by Universities that launder the private money to get around the limits, should be illegal and punishable by law. The political system in the USA is bought and paid for by special interests.

[dmcavalier]

It would seem Mr. Romney is most upset at the fact that he can't manipulate campaign finance rules to his own benefit. It is politicians like Romney that are precisely the reason we must have campaign finance laws in the first place.

[korper70]

Campaign finance laws are just thinly veiled incumbent protection laws. The only reasons Romney is whining about them now are 1) he can gain a few political points by attacking the 'establishment' and 2) they aren't working in his favor at this moment.

And as far as Gingrich's comments are concerned, is anyone surprised? He has no respect for the U.S. Constitution, the highest law of the land, so why should we expect him to have respect for mere regulations?

[Cm_haiden]

If you don't want to compete in the marketplace of ideas get out.

[bc-1948]

I agree with him on the Super PACS - strongly disagree with him on the federal mandate. The federal mandate is all that makes sure everyone pays something for health care. Unless you believe we should just let anyone without health insurance die - which I hope you don't.

[Ban_the_Lobbyists]

Corporations (unions, special interests, etc, or their lobbyists) should not have any money in the government or electoral systems.
Money is not free speech, as so clearly confused by the Citizens United USSC fumble: money is money, to allow for a value-based transaction. What is the money buying in politics aside from influence (corruption).

We can change this flaw or change our Congress: H.J. Res. 88 will eliminate corporate personhood and overturn Citizens United, giving natural people actual rights to influence our government. Imagine, a representative democracy that represents people.

Call your U.S. Representative and ask them to support this bill. If they do not, they represent corporate interests over yours and then you can vote them out of Congress in November. We either get our government back, or we get a new Congress.

The text of the bill and current list of co-sponsors can be found at the Library of Congress (thomas[dot]loc[dot]gov).

Mitt's correct: superPACS are dangerous hold a very large, unaccountable form of influence.