|
MrRodgers -> RE: FEC (8/22/2015 10:25:24 AM)
|
The FEC shouldn't be encouraging or discouraging anything.
The FEC should be limited to the administration of federal campaign finance laws.
The FEC should have an odd number of voting members if only because between 2008 and 2014, they had over 200 ties. Many see this as deliberate so that little or no action...can be taken.
From Wiki: Critics of the FEC, including campaign finance reform supporters such as Common Cause and Democracy 21, have complained that it is a classic example of regulatory capture where it serves the interests of the ones it was intended to regulate. The FEC's bipartisan structure renders the agency "toothless." Critics also claim that most FEC penalties for violating election law come well after the actual election in which they were committed. Additionally, some critics claim that the commissioners tend to act as an arm of the "regulated community" of parties, interest groups, and politicians when issuing rulings and writing regulations.
Others point out, however, that the Commissioners rarely divide evenly along partisan lines, and that the response time problem may be endemic to the system. To complete steps necessary to resolve a complaint - including time for defendants to respond to the complaint, time to investigate and engage in legal analysis, and finally, where warranted, prosecution - necessarily takes far longer than the comparatively brief period of a political campaign.
|
|
|
|
