http://www.hillnews.com/news/050703/edwards.aspx "Sen. John Edwards’ presidential campaign finance documents show a pattern of giving by low-level employees at law firms, a number of whom appear to have limited financial resources and no prior record of political donations. Records submitted to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) show these individuals have often given $2,000 to the North Carolina Democrat, the maximum permitted by law. In many instances, all the checks from a given firm arrived on the same day — from partners, attorneys, and other support staff. Some of these support staff have not voted in the past, and those who have voted include registered Republicans, according to public records on file with various county registrars of voting. Edwards’ campaign records also reveal that many of these individuals’ spouses and relatives contributed the maximum on the same day. The Hill found many of them to be first-time givers. Some have no previous demonstrable interest in politics, while others appear to be active Republicans." This seems like an obvious example of skirting the "$2000 Rule", but I guess we'll have to wait and see!
America's electoral process, much like its tax policey is set up to give the impression of fairness while favoring the entrenched and powerful. They make stupid little reforms like the $2000 rule that are filled with so many loopholes that make them powerless. They refuse to give free broadcast time to candidates but they make these meaningless rules for show.
While I could agree, you don't seem to address the issue at hand, iman. With or without these loopholes, Edwards' people seem to have been doing some rather sloopy jumping through said loopholes. The funny thing here is to see all these lawyers, and Mr. Edwards made tons of cash as a lawyer, doing whatever they could to elect their buddy. Law practice, while a nobel profession, is now seen (and at times deservedly so) as concerned about number one, themselves. The public and Congress are looking to address silly lawsuits and to cap their earning by limiting damage awards. They may not be a strong lobby by total numbers, but they have the cash. Too bad those "stupid little reforms" forced them to play their illegal hand. The thing to ask now is if Edwards can distance himself enough from the issue. If the reporting can uncover Edwards knowledge of said issue, then he is toast. Even if he can distance himself, wouldn't that show that he cannot control his own people? If you make that leap, then how could he be qualified to be President? I mean, unless he has a Vice President who actually runs the show.
I agree. I don't think it wss surprising that it was democratic edwards who got caught because more dems opposed the campaign finance reform due to their lack of corp. fund raising power. On a personal note, My old undegraduate professor predict this exact thing to happen for the democratic party when the campaign reforms were passed.
actually, Edward's campaign wouldn't get in trouble for this, the company would. Edwards would have to return the money, but the company's the one breaking the law, not the campaign
Senator Edwards should know better. If a Democrat needs money, the sensible thing to do is to visit the local Buddist temple.
or bring in a corporate exec. who's been fleecing his stockholders and whose company's practices will result in the indictment of most the top officials. oh wait...wrong party
I'm really not surprised by this at all. I'd be surprised if her were the only candidate (Dem or GOP) to do so.