As a right wing group buys massive ad time in key swing states this week, a federal appellate court handed down a consequential ruling that could shed light on the flood of secret money behind the ads.

Crossroads GPS, Karl Rove’s so-called “social welfare” organization, is set to pummel President Obama this week with $25 million worth of ad time in ten swing states, including Ohio, Pennsylvania, Colorado, and Florida. The group is organized under a tax status that allows it to put up thinly veiled campaign commercials as “issue ads,” all while hiding its donors in total secrecy.

Now, groups like Crossroads may be required to disclose those donors after all. A federal district court judge in April overturned a Federal Election Commission decision that granted blatantly political “social welfare” groups a pass on disclosure.

That earlier decision was put on hold by a stay. But on Monday, an appellate court refused to extend the stay, meaning that groups like Crossroads GPS should now be obligated to disclose their big-money backers.

The Huffington Post’s coverage of the ruling included reactions from observers:

“This case represents the first major breakthrough in the effort to restore for the public the disclosure of contributors who are secretly providing massive amounts to influence federal elections," said Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer, one of the lawyers who filed the original lawsuit that led to the April decision, in a statement.

The office of House Administration Committee ranking Democrat Robert A. Brady issued a statement Tuesday saying, "As of today, any entity creating electioneering communications will have to disclose the identity of their top donors."

"As far as we see, the groups now have an obligation, pursuant to the district court ruling, to disclose all their donors of over $1,000," said Tara Malloy, a lawyer with the Campaign Legal Center, a group that aims to reduce the influence of money in politics.

While Monday’s ruling is a watershed in this season of unlimited and largely undisclosed money, experts expect the case to head from here to the Supreme Court, which itself single-handedly ushered in a renewed era of corporate dominance with its disastrous Citizens United decision. What’s more, it’s uncertain whether Crossroads or similar groups will abide by the ruling, figuring that the Supreme Court will step in or the penalties won’t amount to much.

That’s why over 55,000 progressives united to ask the IRS to investigate and clamp down on the nefarious activity of groups like Rove’s Crossroads GPS and the Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity. We’re pushing several avenues for reform while Citizens United and similar decisions stand. This latest news is heartening, but we know there’s plenty of hard work ahead.

Full coverage of the $25 million Crossroads GPS ad buy here.

Huffington Post – Campaign finance disclosure decision means Rove, others could suddenly have to disclose donors – One of the most consequential campaign finance loopholes affecting the 2012 race -- the one allowing big-money donors to secretly funnel millions into campaign ads -- is now closed, after an appellate court ruling on Monday. In April, a district court judge struck down a Federal Election Commission regulation that allowed donors to certain nonprofit groups -- including those created by Karl Rove and the Koch brothers -- to evade normal disclosure requirements. And on Monday, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit turned down a request to stay that ruling on a 2 to 1 vote. READ MORE

The Nation/Opinion – Why Obama must hold Wall Street accountable – Late last week, I heard the news about J.P. Morgan’s staggering $2 billion in losses on the same day I read Matt Taibbi’s Rolling Stone article about the death of financial reform and Nick Confessore’s New York Times Magazine piece about President Obama’s fundraising on Wall Street. After reading these two articles in conjunction with the J.P. Morgan news, I could only come to one conclusion: it’s impossible to “reform” Wall Street if the president is dependent on the financial sector to bankroll his re-election campaign. The banks can be Obama’s friend or his enemy, but right now they can’t be both. READ MORE

Associated Press – Crossroads announcing $25 million ad push – An independent group favoring Republican presidential rival Mitt Romney is launching a $25 million, monthlong advertising campaign in 10 states against President Barack Obama, further escalating an expensive TV ad war in presidential battlegrounds six months before Election Day. Crossroads GPS plans to open the effort Thursday by spending $8 million on a TV ad that castigates Obama on the economy by using his own words against him. READ MORE

Politico – Democrats rush into arms of super PACs – Congressional Democrats who publicly proclaimed that super PACs are the scourge of modern politics are now going all out to chase the big money that’s fueling the 2012 campaign. With little fanfare, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and his top lieutenants are crisscrossing the country from the Southwest to the Big Apple, meeting with billionaires, high-level business executives and union leaders in a mad scramble to raise money for Majority PAC — and perhaps save their slim Senate majority. READ MORE

The Hill – Sen. McCain huddles with Dems on campaign finance reform – Sen. John McCain is talking with Democrats about a joint effort to require outside groups that have spent millions of dollars on this year’s elections to disclose their donors. McCain (R-Ariz.), once Congress’s leading champion of campaign finance reform, has kept a low profile on the issue in recent years…A Democratic leadership aide said the bill is stalled without Republican support and said it might or might not reach the floor this year. McCain’s support would boost its prospects immediately. “That would change everything,” said the aide. “That would breathe new life into it.” READ MORE

The Atlantic – The Obama super PAC ad makes a mockery of campaign-finance laws – Well, here's a bit of fortuitous timing. Just Monday, the Obama campaign released a new ad attacking Mitt Romney's time at Bain Capital. The case study for the two-minute spot -- which will run in Virginia, Ohio, Colorado, Pennsylvania, and Iowa -- is GST Steel, a factory in Kansas City. Today, Priorities USA released the ad above, also attacking Romney's time at Bain Capital. It uses as its case study GST Steel, and it's airing in Colorado, Florida, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Virginia. Priorities USA is a pro-Obama super PAC run by Bill Burton, who was previously a deputy White House press secretary and a member of Obama's 2008 campaign team…Now, super PACs are allowed to spend in support of one another, but they're legally prohibited from coordinating strategy with formal campaigns…[But] even when there aren't backchannel conversations going on, the super PAC and the campaign are able to push a nearly identical message at basically the same time anyway. READ MORE

The New Yorker – Money unlimited: How Chief Justice John Roberts orchestrated the Citizens United decision – When Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission was first argued before the Supreme Court, on March 24, 2009, it seemed like a case of modest importance. The issue before the Justices was a narrow one. The McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law prohibited corporations from running television commercials for or against Presidential candidates for thirty days before primaries. During that period, Citizens United, a nonprofit corporation, had wanted to run a documentary, as a cable video on demand, called “Hillary: The Movie,” which was critical of Hillary Clinton. The F.E.C. had prohibited the broadcast under McCain-Feingold, and Citizens United had challenged the decision. There did not seem to be a lot riding on the outcome…Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Jr., summoned Theodore B. Olson, the lawyer for Citizens United, to the podium…If the Justices had resolved the case as Olson had suggested, today Citizens United might well be forgotten—a narrow ruling on a remote aspect of campaign-finance law. Instead, the oral arguments were about to take the case—and the law—in an entirely new direction. READ MORE

Politico – President Obama’s Wall Street problem – The giant $2 billion trading loss at JPMorgan Chase highlights a central problem in President Barack Obama’s case for a second term: Four years after the financial crisis nearly brought the nation to its knees, very little appears to have changed. No high-profile bank executives are in jail. Special multi-agency task forces to go after financial fraud and mortgage market abuses appeared in State of the Union addresses, only to issue a few news releases and mostly vanish from public view. And now one of the largest banks in the United States, headed by a Democrat and operating with government guarantees, has turned in the kind of headline-grabbing, casino-style style loss that drives voters crazy and that Obama’s financial reform bill was supposed to stop. READ MORE

Salon – Congress’s small-money champ – Maryland congressman John Sarbanes, D-3rd, isn’t in a highly contested race this year — his opponent is Constitution Party candidate and bartender Eric Knowles. So he has decided to conduct an experiment. Could a congressional candidate in 2012 fund his campaign largely with contributions from small donors? And could he build a network of donors that could be mobilized at a moment’s notice, to pony up cash and fend off attacks by a super PAC? READ MORE

The Hill – Warren calls for Dimon to step down as New York Fed bank director – Democratic Massachusetts Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren called for JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon to resign his position as a director at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. In a statement posted on her website, Warren said Dimon stepping down would “send a signal to the American people that Wall Street bankers get it and to show that they understand the need for responsibility and accountability.” READ MORE

Reuters – JPMorgan is big donor to presidential campaigns – JPMorgan Chase & Co made big donations to U.S. presidential campaigns, particularly Mitt Romney's, as it lobbied against financial regulations, according to a Reuters analysis of campaign financial reports on Friday…Romney's campaign raised $358,219 from employees of JPMorgan and its affiliates through the end of March and the Republican National Committee raised an additional $39,758 from JPMorgan employees and the company's Political Action Committee…Through March, the Obama campaign and the Democratic National Committee together had raised $156,769 from employees of JPMorgan and its affiliates, including $64,997 raised by the Obama Victory Fund, a joint fundraising committee that splits receipts between the Obama campaign and the DNC. READ MORE

The Campaign Finance Institute – Study: Public financing contributes to greater diversity of participation in NYC elections – A new report jointly released today by the Campaign Finance Institute of Washington DC and the Brennan Center for Justice at the NYU School of Law offers powerful evidence that New York City's public financing system has contributed to a fundamental change in the relationship between candidates and their donors. With the program in place, there has been a dramatic increase in the number and diversity of the city’s residents who participate in the process. New York State is considering a system of public campaign financing for state elections similar to New York City’s small donor matching fund program, based in part on the assumption that it would bring greater fairness and diversity to state elections. The results of this new study support that claim. READ MORE

UPI – 2012 election drowning in secret money – The 2012 elections are awash in secret money, with donors accountable to no one, while the national media sleeps and few voters seem to care. If money has an impact in U.S. elections, the race for the White House and other high offices may be determined by faceless donors pulling the strings from the shadows. Not exactly an image promoted by the Founding Fathers. READ MORE

Posted In: Today's News

Milwaukee Journal Sentinel – In film, Walker talks of ‘divide and conquer’ union strategy – A filmmaker released a video Thursday that shows Gov. Scott Walker saying he would use "divide and conquer" as a strategy against unions. Walker made the comments to Beloit billionaire Diane Hendricks, who has since given $510,000 to the governor's campaign - making her Walker's single-largest donor and the largest known donor to a candidate in state history…In the video shot on Jan. 18, 2011 - shortly before Walker's controversial budget-repair bill was introduced and spawned mass protests - Hendricks asked the governor whether he could make Wisconsin a "completely red state, and work on these unions, and become a right-to-work" state. The Republican donor was referring to right-to-work laws, which prohibit private-sector unions from compelling workers to pay union dues if the workers choose not to belong to the union. Walker replied that his "first step" would be "to divide and conquer" through his budget-adjustment bill, which curtailed most collective bargaining for most public employee unions. READ MORE

OpenSecrets – Super PAC spending teeters at $100 million mark – Expenditures by super PACs were expected to hit the $100 million mark today, further proof that outside spending will far outstrip anything seen in previous election cycles. Here's one way to look at how much more is being spent in the 2012 cycle: A single super PAC, the pro-Mitt Romney Restore Our Future, has already spent more -- $44.5 million -- than all outside groups combined had spent by this point in 2008. That 2008 number, about $30.9 million, is roughly one-quarter of this cycle's overall outside spending total of $122.7 million. And the $100 million spent just by super PACs this cycle is already $30 million more than the entire sum of all outside spending in the 2004 election, the year that the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth 527 organization made a splash with its attacks on Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry. READ MORE

Huffington Post  - Super PACs, conservatives lead surge in independent spending on congressional races – On Tuesday night Indiana conservative upstart Richard Mourdock defeated 36-year incumbent Sen. Dick Lugar in a primary battle that featured no fewer than 12 independent groups -- not connected to candidates or political parties -- spending money to support their favored candidate. The spending in Indiana was part of an April trend of more independent group involvement in congressional races. As the Republican presidential primary wound down, spending by independent groups in congressional races ticked up. These groups, the unlimited-money super PACs and nonprofits, spent $7.87 million on congressional races in April, a rise of more than 500 percent from the $1.9 million spent in March, according to a review of Federal Election Commission records. READ MORE

Los Angeles Times – ‘Super PAC’ supporting Romney rethinks donations from federal contractors – Anxiety about the effect of a ban on political spending by federal contractors is prompting new caution by a company connected to such donations and a "super PAC" that accepted them. Restore Our Future — a super PAC that has spent more than $42 million on behalf of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney — had previously solicited money from federal contractors. Now it is warning the contractors to get legal advice before giving. Meanwhile, Oxbow Carbon, a major coal and petroleum supplier that gave Restore Our Future $750,000 last year, now says its contracts to sell fuel to the federal government are through a sister company that is a separate legal entity — an arrangement that allows it to skirt the prohibition on federal contractors making political expenditures. READ MORE

The New York Times – Liberals focus outside money on grass roots – After months on the sidelines, major liberal donors including the financier George Soros are preparing to inject up to $100 million into independent groups to aid Democrats’ chances this fall. But instead of going head to head with the conservative “super PACs” and outside groups that have flooded the presidential and Congressional campaigns with negative advertising, the donors are focusing on grass-roots organizing, voter registration and Democratic turnout. The departure from the conservatives’ approach, which helped Republicans wrest control of the House in 2010, partly reflects liberal donors’ objections to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, which paved the way for super PACs and unbridled campaign spending. READ MORE

Roll Call – Using super PACs to get rid of super PACs – Want to get big money out of politics? Set up a super PAC. That seemingly incongruous formula has been seized on by a growing number of watchdog groups, self-styled reformers and student activists who have set up more than a dozen super PACs aimed at putting a stop to unrestricted campaign spending. With names such as America’s Super PAC for the Permanent Elimination of America’s Super PACs, Citizens Against Super PACs and No Dirty Money Elections, these protest political action committees are sober-minded, satirical or sometimes both. READ MORE

Politico – Axelrod says ad buy is $25 million, slams Rove and Kochs as super PAC ‘contract killers’ – David Axelrod told reporters on a conference call this morning that the Obama re-elect will spend $25 million on ads this month, dropping the equivalent of a nuclear bomb that a number of political watchers had been expecting to land in the defining pre-convention season. It's a breathtaking figure, but one that Axelrod framed as pushing back on the broad spectrum of anti-President Obama ads coming from Republican-leaning groups like American Crossroads, Americans for Prosperity and the American Energy Alliance. He described Karl Rove (Crossroads) and the Koch brothers (AFP) as 'contract killers out there in super PAC land." READ MORE

MinnPost/Opinion – 3M shareholders should support resolution on political spending – Like it or not, political advertisements will bombard us throughout the summer and in the fall. And if this spring is any indication, we will witness some of the most negative ads in history. According to a study by the Wesleyan Media Project, presidential ads so far this year have been 70 percent negative compared to just 9 percent during the entire campaign in 2008… This outrageous spending is due in part to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision… Corporations should resist the temptation to engage in this arms race because corporate political spending is both bad for business and bad for our democracy. That is why 3M shareholders should support a resolution at the annual shareholder meeting today that urges the board of directors to adopt a policy prohibiting the use of corporate funds for any political election or campaign. READ MORE

The Salem News – Tierney asks Tisei to sign ‘People’s Pledge’ – Incumbent Democratic Congressman John Tierney borrowed a play from Republican Sen. Scott Brown yesterday, calling for an agreement to limit the impact of outside money on the Massachusetts 6th Congressional race. Tierney sent a letter asking Republican opponent Richard Tisei to sign a "People's Pledge" identical to the one signed by Brown and Democratic opponent Elizabeth Warren in January. The pledge financially penalizes a campaign for any advertisement run by a third-party group, such as a super PAC. "This pledge prevents these outside groups from airing independent expenditures on television, radio or the Internet supporting or attacking either candidate," Tierney said in his letter. "If they do, the candidate who benefited from the ad has to pay 50 percent of the ad's cost to a charity chosen by their opponent, so there is a powerful enforcement mechanism." READ MORE

At a time when billionaire donors, mostly Republican but some Democratic, are lining up to support super PACs in an attempt to buy this year's election, one big political donor is drawing an ethical line:

“‘I don’t want to see democracy go in that direction,’ [Warren] Buffett said yesterday at the annual shareholders meeting of his Berkshire Hathaway Inc. (BRK/A) (A) in Omaha, Nebraska. ‘You have to take a stand some place.’”

Buffett recognizes that the super PAC arms race damages our democratic process and allows our elections to be sold to the highest bidder.

Yesterday, Russ asked progressives across the country to send a message to Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi: Draw a line in the sand and reject cuts to Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid benefits. If you haven’t yet, be sure to sign our petition here.

The story has been picked up by a number of news outlets as tens of thousands call on Leader Pelosi to do the right thing. Here’s a special edition of our news roundup following coverage of the campaign we launched in partnership with CREDO Action:

Huffington Post – Russ Feingold: Nancy Pelosi needs to stand strong – A leading national progressive figure is taking a rare step on Thursday, challenging House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on her commitment to protecting Medicare and Social Security.  Russ Feingold, the former senator from Wisconsin, said in an email to supporters that Pelosi "has signaled a disturbing potential willingness to adopt a plan that could slash these benefits. And it follows a pattern: Too many House Democrats, including Steny Hoyer, are already on board." Feingold's challenge, sent to backers of his group Progressives United, comes after Pelosi has repeatedly said that she would vote in favor of the Simpson-Bowles plan, a deficit cutting project that slashes Social Security and Medicare, while raising revenue and cutting defense spending. The progressive online organization CREDO Action will also be sending an email to its supporters backing up Feingold's challenge. READ MORE

Politico – Feingold: Pelosi wobbly on Social Security – Former Sen. Russ Feingold is going after House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi for what he calls “a disturbing potential willingness to adopt a plan that could slash” Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security benefits. In an email to supporters of his group, Progressives United, Feingold — the Democrat who lost his Wisconsin Senate seat in 2010 — said Pelosi is the latest in a growing trend of Democrats who are wavering on defending Medicare…Feingold’s email comes after Pelosi said last month that she would have voted for the so-called Simpson-Bowles debt reduction plan, which critics say would hurt Social Security and Medicare beneficiaries. She said voting for Simpson-Bowles would be “not even a controversial vote.” READ MORE

The Hill – Feingold rips Pelosi for willingness to consider entitlement cuts – A liberal stalwart is making a surprise attack on Nancy Pelosi, accusing the House minority leader of signaling “a disturbing potential willingness” to slash entitlement programs that Democrats consider sacred. Former Sen. Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) on Thursday sent out an email through his Progressives United advocacy group criticizing Pelosi for saying she would support the Simpson-Bowles deficit plan, which called for using cuts to Medicare, Medicaid and Social Security to close the nation’s budget gap. “Recently, Democratic Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has signaled a disturbing potential willingness to adopt a plan that could slash these benefits. And it follows a pattern: Too many House Democrats, including Steny Hoyer, are already on board,” Feingold wrote in the email, which directs respondents to a petition. READ MORE

Posted In: Today's News

NPR News – Do campaign ads seem more negative this year? It’s not just you – If you thought the presidential primaries were extraordinarily negative, now there's statistical evidence that you were right. A new analysis of TV ads finds that 70 percent of the messages were negative — a trend spearheaded by the heavily financed superPACs supporting the candidates. At this point in the 2008 election, 91 percent of TV ads were positive. READ MORE

The New York Times – Mitch McConnell praises Citizens United – Long before he became the Republican leader, Senator Mitch McConnell had built a career out of opposing limits to political fundraising and spending, supposedly in the name of free speech. By helping reduce barriers to the purchase of influence in Washington, he became one of his party’s most adept money raisers. But Mr. McConnell has outdone himself with a legal brief submitted recently to the Supreme Court that’s blind to how unlimited contributions damage the political system. Not only is there no reason for the court to reconsider or overturn its 2010 Citizens United ruling, he wrote, but the events of the last two years actually support the correctness of the decision. READ MORE

Time – Wisconsin cheddar: How Scott Walker’s fundraising windfall could decide the recall – The battle of Wisconsin was never going to be cheap. Scott Walker, the Republican governor facing a landmark recall election next month, is perhaps the most polarizing politician in the country not named Obama. The June 5 election in a bitterly divided swing state is seen by both sides as a bellwether in the ongoing clash between Big Labor and Big Business, and each is flexing its financial muscles. “We’ve spent a lot of money in Wisconsin. We’re going to spend more,” David Koch told a reporter in February. READ MORE

Bloomberg – The FEC: A toothless watchdog for a $6 billion election – Worried about election fraud in 2012? Consider this: The Federal Election Commission has six members, and five of them are serving on borrowed time. Cynthia Bauerly’s and Matthew Petersen’s terms expired in 2011, Steven Walther’s and Donald McGahn’s in 2009. Then there’s Ellen Weintraub: She was supposed to be replaced five years ago. The FEC, which enforces the nation’s campaign finance laws, has one of the most important jobs in the federal government. This year the watchdog will oversee an election season in which political parties and a collection of outside groups are expected to lay out $6 billion. Yet, the lack of fresh blood on the commission has rendered it nearly powerless. READ MORE

Helena Independent Record – Schweitzer signs initiative opposing corporate donations – Gov. Brian Schweitzer signed an initiative Thursday that supporters hope will boost a national effort to overturn the 2010 U.S. Supreme Court decision that allowed corporations to give unlimited money in political campaigns. “You will send a signal to this entire world that Montana is not for sale,” Schweitzer said at a ceremony outside the Montana House where he signed Initiative 166…I-166 is a nonbinding policy statement that calls on Montana elected and appointed state and federal officials to implement “a policy that corporations are not human beings with constitutional rights.” READ MORE

iWatch News – New questions raised over Aaron Schock’s rundraising efforts – Two $25,000 donations during the final days of a hotly contested Illinois primary are raising more questions about whether super PACs — the political committees that have seen a flood of money from millionaires and billionaires — are being used to circumvent campaign contribution limits. READ MORE

Posted In: Today's News

In his recent piece for New York Magazine, Frank Rich pulled no punches delving into the means and mythos of some of the most salient players in this election season, particularly on the Republican side. And he wasn’t writing about the candidates.

He was writing about their billionaire funders.

Rich’s article explores the class of super-donors in this race, individuals (mostly older, rich, white men) whose financial heft has been unleashed by the Supreme Court’s damaging Citizens United ruling.

These men, Rich wrote, are now able to single-handedly control the direction of campaigns by throwing million-dollar checks at super PACs and blatantly political groups masquerading as “social welfare” organizations, which use the money to pillory opponents. Rich’s term of art for this elite group is “sugar daddies:”

Sugar daddies—whom I’ll define here as private donors or their privately held companies writing checks totaling $1 million or more (sometimes much more) in this election cycle—are largely a Republican phenomenon, most of them one degree of separation from Karl Rove and his unofficial partners in erecting a moneyed shadow GOP, David and Charles Koch. At last look, there were 25 known sugar daddies on the right (or more, if you want to count separately the spouses and children who pitch in).

While these donors have their own particular policy quirks, and have supported different candidates throughout the rancorous Republican primary fight, they all seem to have something in common: an eagerness to gain influence through their cash.

Rich examined the ruthlessness with which today’s GOP kingmakers throw their weight around to compare them to the robber barons of the Gilded Age, over a century ago:

Like corporate donors, sugar daddies tend to seek favors to serve their particular special interests (notably the golden oldies of oil and finance) and dedicate themselves to fighting and avoiding taxes. But their ethos departs from the corporate model. Precisely because they are lone wolves responsible to no one but themselves—not independent shareholders, let alone the communities they plunder—they can be “more ruthless than Wall Street,” as the Newt Gingrich super-PAC put it in its ad attacking Romney’s Bain career. Vulture capitalists are throwbacks not so much to the relatively modern bankers and industrialists whom FDR set out to police in the Great Depression as to the more primitive titans and robber barons of the Gilded Age that Teddy Roosevelt took on a generation earlier.

Indeed, as Russ has said often, we’ve entered a modern “Gilded Age on steroids.” The forces of corporate dominance -- and dominance of the billionaires atop those corporations -- have never been more prevalent, or more pernicious. There is some good news, in that we can at least scrutinize the people writing these big checks and their motivations.

But, as others and we have pointed out, most money in this election has been spent to blast opponents while hiding donors in total secrecy. The disturbing lack of transparency only adds insult to the injury of unlimited spending in this race.

Posted In: Corporate Pandering

Politico – GOP outside group pushes to shield donors – In a move designed to shield the identities of anonymous donors and possibly set the stage for a court fight over disclosure, one of the deepest-pocketed Republican outside groups is unveiling eight proposed ads attacking President Barack Obama and defending Mitt Romney — including an ad that touts “Romneycare.” American Future Fund — which has already spent $7.5 million on hard-hitting anti-Obama ads in the 2012 cycle — revealed details of the ads in a request for a ruling released Tuesday by the Federal Election Commission. The request asks the FEC whether AFF would be required to reveal the finances behind the ads — including the donors who funded them — if it aired them. The group “does not want to risk being compelled to violate its donors’ privacy expectations,” its lawyers wrote in the request, which they filed with the FEC last month. READ MORE

Los Angeles Times – Outside groups flood swing states with ads targeting candidates – A hard-hitting commercial blasting President Obama's stimulus spending as a "failure" flooded television sets last week in eight swing states that will be decisive in November's presidential election. It was not the product of presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney, nor of the national Republican Party. Instead, it was made by Americans for Prosperity, a Virginia-based nonprofit that for months has poured millions into anti-Obama commercials. Its latest buy totaled $6.1 million in airtime. READ MORE

The New York Times – Pro-Romney ‘super PAC’ begins $4 million ad buy – A “super PAC” that spent tens of millions of dollars to help make Mitt Romney the presumptive Republican nominee is now getting ready to spend even more to make him president. The group, Restore Our Future, has begun buying as much $4 million worth of 30-second television advertisements in a least eight general election swing states, according to a Democrat who tracks media buys. The buys, first reporter by Chuck Todd of NBC, follow Mr. Romney’s emergence as his party’s presumptive nominee last month. READ MORE

The New York Times Magazine – Obama’s not-so-hot date with Wall Street – In late January, Brad Thompson, the Obama campaign’s chief liaison to major donors in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut, called some of his contacts in the area, most of them Wall Street executives. The president’s next trip to town would be in early March. Would they be interested in helping to host a small dinner? For Obama — and therefore Thompson — things had not been going well in New York. The president had already traveled to the city around 20 times during his first term, but he wasn’t collecting money from Wall Street the way he used to. By the end of January 2008, Obama had raised well over $7 million from the securities and investment industry. By the end of January this year, he had only $2.4 million to show. Thompson needed this event to bring in at least $2 million more. READ MORE

Posted In: Today's News