End Citizens United filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, saying Rick Scott’s campaign used a “super PAC”. He is accused of avoiding federal limits on direct contributions to candidates’ campaigns. Rick Scott helped his campaign coffers by raising $78 million. Scott’s New Republican PAC violated the anti-coordination law and planned to get him elected to the US Senate, but he was their former chairman. Adam Bozzi, ECH’s Communications Director, believes Scott cares more about his political ambitions than the law. Scott evaded campaign finance laws using soft money from the super PAC.
Scott’s campaign denied the accusations, but documentation was presented by End Citizens United that suggested he was still working with the PAC recently. In January, the PAC’s website said Scott was the chairman.
Follow End Citizens United on Twitter
End Citizens United was created in response to a decision made by the Supreme
Court in 2010. It was started on March 1, 2015 to bring about campaign finance reform. It supports candidates who want to get Big Money out of politics and ballots that focus on this topic. They want to overturn Citizens United, which allows donations to be unlimited and undisclosed. They are based out of Washington DC.
Despite Scott’s denial, End Citizens United found out that he and the New Republican are working together with the Jenny Rucker fundraiser. Rick Scott and the New Republican had the same address and they paid for one of his polls. He was raising money in February for the New Republican, according to the Tampa Bay Times. The Washington Post said he hosted a dinner for the New Republican donors in March. Mark Caputo said they campaigned for Scott in March, while one of his polls was in the paper. End Citizens United complained that the Committee gave his campaign money.
They believe more Democrat elections will lead to campaign finance solutions. They also want disclosure laws passed by Congress. Mr. Bozzi believes it is necessary to overturn Citizens United trough a constitutional amendment. The argument should be that unlimited campaign contributions are not covered by free speech.
Find more about End Citizens United: https://actionnetwork.org/groups/end-citizens-united