The New York Times published a deeply disturbing article about the e billionaires who are pumping huge sums into the 2026 midterm elections and about dark money vehicles some use to hide their influence.
I am giving you free access to the articles: no pay walls.
This one shows who they are: “Meet the Megadonors.” Most are Republicans, tech entrepreneurs, and crypto kings.
This one focuses on the dark money that is pouring into state elections to support issues and candidates.
It wasn’t always like this.
In 2002, Senator John McCain of Arizona (R) and Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin (D) sponsored the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, commonly called the McCain–Feingold Act.
Its central purpose was to reduce the influence of large, unregulated political contributions.
It banned national political parties from raising or spending unlimited “soft money.” It restricted corporations and labor unions from financing certain broadcast political advertisements immediately before elections.it I ncreased disclosure requirements, and it raised some limits on direct contributions to candidates.
McCain-Feingold passed the Senate 60-40 and was signed into law by President George W. Bush.
The Supreme Court initially upheld most of it.
In 2003, McConnell v. FEC, the Supreme Court upheld the central provisions—including the restrictions on soft money and electioneering communications.
Then the Court gradually dismantled important parts.
In 2007, in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life, the Supreme Court restricted the government’s ability to regulate certain issue advertisements.
In 2008, the Supreme Court (in Davis v. FEC) struck down the so-called “Millionaire’s Amendment,” which raised the limits of campaign funding for individuals running against a wealthy, self-financing candidate. That attempt to level the financial playing field was eliminated by the Court.
And then came the big decision that ripped the teeth out of campaign finance reform: Citizens United.
In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that corporations and unions have First Amendment protection to spend unlimited amounts independently to influence elections. This invalidated a major part of McCain–Feingold.
Citizens United, together with subsequent cases, helped produce the modern system of unlimited independent expenditures and Super PACs.
We are now in the era of Citizens United, the decision by the U.S. Supreme Court that negated most limits on political spending.
Why did the U.S. Supreme Court swerve sharply against campaign finance reform?
John Roberts was appointed to be Chief Justice of the Supreme Court in 2005 by President George W. Bush. He formed a 5-4 majority with Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito,
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Beyond the billionaires, there’s an entire political class that makes a living off campaigns fueled by PAC money. Haley Stevens spent $60 million—think how many consultants and operatives got paid. If rejecting PAC money becomes the norm, their livelihoods are threatened. That gives the PAC-funded political establishment a powerful incentive to see non-PAC candidates fail.
LikeLike
Eisenhower warned us famously that creating a group of people who made money off war would make war more probable. Creating a political industrial complex makes tyranny more probable.
LikeLike