Following Citizens United v. FEC — the 2010 Supreme Court decision often (and incorrectly) credited for creating SuperPACs — a lesser-known but enormously consequential ruling called Speechnow v. FEC reasoned the following:
If independent expenditures made by SuperPACs do NOT create the risk of quid pro quo corruption (per Citizens United’s reasoning), then contributions to SuperPACs surely cannot create that same risk, and therefore should be unlimited.
That logic was plainly WRONG — as a matter of both fact and common sense. The reason for this is simple: contributions to SuperPACs can (and do) create the risk of quid pro quo corruption.
And we have the proof.
In this edition of The Maine Question, we are highlighting three real-world examples where SuperPAC contributions were used to facilitate political bribes.
(And, yes, we promise to keep these short)
1. Senator Robert Menendez
In 2015, US Senator Robert Menendez (D-NJ) — who was recently found guilty for accepting (literal) gold bars and is now serving 11 years in prison — was indicted for giving a Florida ophthalmologist named Salomon Melgen his promise of personal advocacy at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services in exchange for a $600,000 contribution to a SuperPAC dedicated to helping Democrats win Senatorial races called “Majority PAC.” The Senator also allegedly helped Melgen pursue VISA applications for three of his girlfriends.
Quid = $600,000 donation to a SuperPAC (Melgen)
Quo = high level of advocacy at the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services and help getting VISAs for Melgen’s girlfriends (Menendez)
2. Greg Lindberg
In 2019, an insurance executive named Greg Lindberg — who was recently convicted for bribery and wire fraud — was indicted for allegedly promising a North Carolina insurance commissioner named Mike Causey millions of dollars routed through a SuperPAC in exchange for the removal of a senior insurance regulator who oversaw the periodic examination of Lindberg’s business.
Quid = multi-million dollar donation to a SuperPAC (Lindberg)
Quo = removal of a senior insurance regulator (Causey)
3. Larry Householder
In 2020, the Ohio House Speaker Larry Householder and Matt Borges, the former Republican Party chair of Ohio, allegedly promised to protect House Bill 6 — a multi-million dollar bailout for a company called FirstEnergy’s nuclear plants — in exchange for $60 million funneled to dark money 501(c)4 groups and a SuperPAC. Householder and Matt were charged with racketeering conspiracy, and Householder remains in prison.
Quid = $60 million funneled to 501(c)4 groups and a SuperPAC (FirstEnergy)
Quo = the promise of passing and protecting a bill bailing out FirstEnergy (Householder)
Notice how each of these cases demonstrates exactly what Speechnow v. FEC said could never happen.
Yet, it is happening — repeatedly!
Large coordinated contributions to SuperPACs ARE being used as a vehicle for political bribery in the United States.
So what’s the solution?
For decades, donation limits have been the norm for candidate committees. Americans recognized that direct contributions over a certain threshold start to look an awful lot like political bribery — creating political debts that are repaid to donors through ‘tit for tat’ exchanges involving favors, roll-call votes, and other actions that would reasonably cause a legislator to defect from their constituents.
Why not limit contributions to independent political action committees (i.e., SuperPACs) in the same way?
This is not a hypothetical question.
We asked this question on Maine’s 2024 ballot and found that 74.9% of voters, or over 600,000 people, agreed that contributions to SuperPACs should be limited to $5k in the interest of preventing quid pro quo corruption — which the Supreme Court has long recognized as a legitimate governmental interest (see Buckley v. Valeo, 1976).
This law in Maine was immediately challenged by those who benefit from the dark money loopholes, and our organization, Equal Citizens, is defending the constitutionality of these limits in the First Circuit Court of Appeals.
If you like this series and want more real-world examples, drop a comment, and we will publish Part Two.
PS. A big thank you to the team at Issue One for flagging these real-world examples in their powerful cross-partisan amicus brief — linked here.
[Written by Maia Cook, Executive Director]
Love these examples! More please!