Today the federal election commissioned approved an advisory opinion that will clear the way for Stephen Colbert to create his own "super PAC" to fundraise and spend money in the 2012 elections. The issue in the case was whether Colbert could talk about his PAC on-air, as that might have constituted an illegal contribution by Colbert’s employer, Viacomm, to the PAC. Colbert, using one of the top lawyers in election law, found a way around the law by applying for a press exemption. Colbert essentially argued that as a member of the press he should be allowed to “report” on his own PAC on-air. The FEC ultimately agreed with Colbert in a 5-1 decision today.
Now that Colbert has gained approval for his super PAC the real question is what he will do with it. Colbert has frequently referred to the United States Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision when explaining his PAC. That decision allowed for the formation of these kind of super PAC’s, in which corporations could donate and spend unlimited amounts of money in order to influence elections. Progressives strongly criticized Citizens United, saying that the decision would open up the floodgates of corporate influence in elections.
Through his super PAC, Colbert appears to be trying to reveal, through parody, just what a sham the United States campaign finance laws have become. Colbert used the same tactics in 2008, when he tried to use Doritos to sponsor his presidential run.
[See also: The very serious point behind Stephen Colbert's super PAC]
However, not everyone is on board with Colbert’s tactics. A number of watchdog groups have argued that Colbert’s PAC could open up a larger loophole which is exploited by others who really do want to influence elections. If Colbert is allowed to “report” on his own PAC via his television show, there is theoretically nothing keeping Bill O’Reilly, Sean Hannity, or Glenn Beck from doing the same through their programs. Colbert’s efforts are ultimately about raising public awareness of the faults of the current system. Whether the public pays attention and actually demands change is another question yet to be answered.
Comments