Super Connected: Outside Groupss Devotion to Individual Candidates and Political Parties Disproves the Supreme Court's Key Assumption in Citizens United That Unregulated Outside Spenders Would Be Independentt

Abstract

Nearly half of the unregulated outside groups that sought to influence the 2012 presidential and congressional elections spent their money to aid just one candidate. Ten additional groups, which accounted for nearly 30 percent of spending by unregulated entities in the 2012 elections, existed to aid either the official Democratic or Republican parties. In total, candidate-specific and party-allied groups accounted for more than 65 percent of all spending by unregulated outside groups in the 2012 elections. Such groups made up seven of the top eight unregulated outside spenders. These findings undercut the key premise relied upon by the Supreme Court in its 2010 decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, which paved the way for outside groups to use unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations or unions to influence elections. The court based its Citizens United decision on its assumption that the new electioneering spending it permitted would be by organizations that acted independently of candidates and parties.