# Koch Brothers to Spend $900 Million on 2016 Elections **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [January 27, 2015, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967 "2015-01-27T00:52:51Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![BobLibDem](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/boblibdem/32/3149_2.png) [@BobLibDem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BobLibDem)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/181 "2015-02-05T14:26:22Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Define “political advertisement”. That was the whole point of the question. When does an “ad” become a “documentary”? If FoxNews makes a documentary on Beghazi when HRC is a candidate, is that an “ad”? > I think your proposal would ensure that very rich people would be elected, if your premise is correct. If it’s possible to buy elections through negative ads (I don’t think it generally is, but it’s YOUR assumption, so let’s see how your proposal stands up to it) then Richie Rich is going to smack down Tommy Poorhouse every time by financing his own campaign. No? > > But more to the point, you are fighting a war from the last century. Social Media is the name of the game these days, and it’s mostly free. There isn’t much that could be done with FoxNews (sic) as they don’t use the public airwaves. However, should they air a Benghazi schlockumentary on the Fox network itself, they should be required to provide equal airtime to the offended party to rebut the false claims. In my scenario, Richie Rich could only contribute $200 to his own campaign, same as Tommy Poorhouse. I’m not as worried about social media tipping elections as I am television ads. Everybody knows that the Tea Party Facebook shares that your halfwit brother-in-law shares don’t influence many people. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/182 "2015-02-05T14:30:30Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Something I wonder. The people who tend to support the idea that money is speech and should be unlimited seem almost gleeful about it, rubbing it in the faces of those who disagree. > > Do you actually like the idea that a small number of people can exert a great amount of political power, which in turn they use to further give themselves even greater power? > > Or do you consider it a necessary because to compromise on that would go against our values? > > To give an example of what I mean: I absolutely support the rights of neo-nazis to have marches. I think it sucksthat anyone would do such a thing, and that there are people who subscribe to those values. And I think that their speech is harmful to society. What they do is a bad thing. And yet it’s a worse thing for society to be able to limit who can speak. And so letting neo-nazis spread their message is a necessary evil in the pursuit of the greater value of free speech. > > Do you view giving greatly disproportionate political power to a select few in the same light? That it’s harmful, and damaging to society, and yet we must accept it because it’s in line with a greater principle? Or do you actually believe that it’s a positive thing, that there’s nothing wrong with it? Or do you simply think that it’s okay because you feel as though it empowers your tribe more than it does the other tribe? I don’t think it’s a coincidence no one who loves big money in politics stepped up to answer this very good question. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 5:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/183 "2015-02-05T17:54:56Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > Cool story, bro. But I think it’s 900 races, not 90. Not that it matters any-- it’s just a bunch of made up numbers anyway. Oh, so basically, your response is that I’m making shit up? Would that mean that you think political advertising has no appreciable effect, then, and these guys are just pissing their money away? Or what, perzackly? So that if one side gets to spend say, ten times as much money, it wouldn’t matter, wouldn’t make any difference? Not even a little difference, say, a few percentage points? Keep in mind, I’d be just tickled half to death to think so, but I don’t think so. Perhaps you’ll share with me the facts that lead you to that conviction? But thanks for the math correction, nice of you to be helpful to a boor of little brain… ---
**Author:** ![Skammer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/skammer/32/143_2.png) [@Skammer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skammer)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/184 "2015-02-05T21:12:38Z")
The Koch’s Americans for Prosperity just scuttled our (Republican) governor’s proposal to expand Medicare in TN - after months of negotiation and just two hours of debate. So I hope they’re getting their money’s worth. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/185 "2015-02-05T21:27:33Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > I don’t think it’s a coincidence no one who loves big money in politics stepped up to answer this very good question. But which side is trying to limit political free speech? The answer to political free speech is more political free speech. If the Soros organizations can spend as much money as they wish in order to influence elections, then the Koch organization should have the same freedom. If the New York Times and MSNBC can spend as much money as they wish in order to influence elections, so should every other organization. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 9:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/186 "2015-02-05T21:29:41Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > The Koch’s Americans for Prosperity just scuttled our (Republican) governor’s proposal to expand Medicare in TN - after months of negotiation and just two hours of debate. So I hope they’re getting their money’s worth. Really? Are you sure that’s what actually happened? 😕 ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 9:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/187 "2015-02-05T21:58:56Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > But which side is trying to limit political free speech? The answer to political free speech is more political free speech. > > If the Soros organizations can spend as much money as they wish in order to influence elections, then the Koch organization should have the same freedom. If the New York Times and MSNBC can spend as much money as they wish in order to influence elections, so should every other organization. Oh, so your issue is equality! Excellent, now we have something we can work with, equality is our issue too! If money is political power, then the guy who has more money has more power. We don’t think that’s quite fair. Good to know you’re with us on that! (Rather a surprise, frankly, but whateverness…) ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/188 "2015-02-05T22:11:37Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Really? Are you sure that’s what actually happened? 😕 [Apparently.](http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/politics/state/story/2015/jan/27/tn-lawmakers-pressured-oppose-haslams-insure-tennessee/284937/) ---
**Author:** ![Pashnish\_Ewing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8797f3/32.png) [@Pashnish\_Ewing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pashnish_Ewing)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/189 "2015-02-05T22:43:00Z")
> [@](#): > > “Unfortunately,” Harris said, “the Tennesseans whose lives would change with access to health care can’t afford to influence legislators in the same way.” I’m no fan of the Koch Bros or this tactic, but those 200,000 uninsured could also call their legislators, no? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 11:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/190 "2015-02-05T23:41:40Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Oh, so your issue is equality! Excellent, now we have something we can work with, equality is our issue too! If money is political power, then the guy who has more money has more power. We don’t think that’s quite fair. Good to know you’re with us on that! (Rather a surprise, frankly, but whateverness…) No. We (you and I) disagree. You want to limit political free speech and I do not. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [February 5, 2015, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/191 "2015-02-05T23:58:29Z")
> [@Skammer](#): > > The Koch’s Americans for Prosperity just scuttled our (Republican) governor’s proposal to expand Medicare in TN - after months of negotiation and just two hours of debate. So I hope they’re getting their money’s worth. > [@BrainGlutton](#): > > [Apparently.](http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/politics/state/story/2015/jan/27/tn-lawmakers-presured-oppose-haslams-insure-tennessee/284937/) Apparently, Americans for Prosperity-Tennessee sent out a mailer saying - _“STOP Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in Tennessee by calling your legislator NOW!” the mailer says, going on to call Medicaid expansion “the central component of Obamacare.”_ Apparently, the voters called their legislators and the legislators responded to the concerns of their constituents. And the bill died. How many other organizations, non-Americans for Prosperity organizations, were also against this bill? None? Some? Most of them? Politics is a bitch. Speak up. Pool your money with like minded people and get you message out. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 12:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/192 "2015-02-06T00:23:28Z")
> [@doorhinge](#): > > Apparently, Americans for Prosperity-Tennessee sent out a mailer saying - > > _“STOP Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in Tennessee by calling your legislator NOW!” the mailer says, going on to call Medicaid expansion “the central component of Obamacare.”_ > > Apparently, the voters called their legislators and the legislators responded to the concerns of their constituents. And the bill died. > [@Skammer](#): > > The Koch’s Americans for Prosperity just scuttled our (Republican) governor’s proposal to expand Medicare in TN . . . And that is what happened. The mechanism they used is irrelevant except insofar as it costs money. ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 12:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/193 "2015-02-06T00:42:31Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#): > > And that is what happened. The mechanism they used is irrelevant except insofar as it costs money. That’s not all that happened. The bill didn’t have popular support. Life goes on. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/194 "2015-02-06T01:30:24Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > What do you think the American Revolution was? The concept of constitutional, limited government? The Bill of Rights? Well, first, it wasn’t about the removal of a representative democracy. It was about the removal of rule by a privileged few – you know, like the Koch brothers – against what Jefferson was referring to when he said that “I hope we shall crush… in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations, which dare already to challenge our government to a trial of strength and bid defiance to the laws of our country.” Do you think the American Revolution was really about the creation of a new, homegrown, anti-democratic aristocracy? Well, like it or not, ya got it anyway. > [@Martin\_Hyde](#): > > Ugh, at least some of this garbage has already been corrected. > > For one, the Kochs are not spending $900m on the 2016 elections. Their organization is (as **ITR champion** points out), and their organization genuinely has a ton of like minded donors. It’s not a scenario where $450m or $500m is coming from the Kochs and the rest from the donors, but rather the Kochs are giving a smallish sum of the whole (in context of the whole it’s still millions.) > > There are websites that show spending on elections, and I’ve actually pointed out that **election spending** is the wrong boogeyman to go after the Kochs about. I don’t believe they were even in the top ten of private spenders on elections in 2012, Sheldon Adelson was by far number one. The Kochs spend a lot of money to influence politics, but they spread it around to a lot of _different type_ of organizations, and certainly not just to campaign related organizations. In fact of the big spenders on conservative causes the Kochs aren’t in the top five who spend on _campaign related_ stuff. So you conveniently forget [dark money](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_money) organizations? Or the fact that advocacy ads are just as influential as direct campaign ads? > [@John\_Mace](#): > > What financial limit should there be on spending for political speech, and how do you come up with that figure? Because my copy of the 1st amendment says “Congress shall make no law…”. It’s one thing to say: Well, that’s only for political speech, but quite another to say: Well, that’s only for political speech costing less than $X. Where does the First Amendment prohibit limitations on the corrupting influence of money on politics, as Jefferson and many others had feared? Except in the delusional brain of Antonin Scalia and his ilk? > [@doorhinge](#): > > I guess Obama could hit up the Hollyweird elite for a few more hundred million in donations? > [@doorhinge](#): > > Maybe you could tell Soros to stop creating/funding political groups that are trying to influence U.S. elections, and to stop donating money to American politics, in general? Right, [because it’s all equivalent](http://sunlightfoundation.com/blog/2014/10/28/dark-money-still-a-republican-game/). :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 1:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/195 "2015-02-06T01:41:33Z")
> [@](#): > > The bill didn’t have popular support. Life goes on… Yeah, but if you’re poor and sick, sometimes don’t seem worth the trouble… Did you do your homework? Like, maybe, google “Medicaid expansion Tennessee popular support”? Maybe you should have. You would have across this… > **[Haslam-backed poll: Tenn. supports Insure Tennessee](https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/politics/2015/02/02/poll-says-tennessee-supports-haslam-health-plan/22764103/)** > > Poll commissioned by group backing Gov. Bill Haslam's health plan says majority of Republicans surveyed support plan \*\* Haslam-backed poll: Tenn. supports Insure Tennessee\*\* (Insure Tennessee was the Medicaid expansion. Not sure if you knew that.) Among the juicy tidbits… > [@](#): > > …Conducted by North Star Opinion Research, a GOP polling firm, the poll focuses on Republican opinions. After contacting 400 people who identify as Republicans, the pollsters say the majority support the plan once they learn more about it, and would be more likely to vote for a lawmaker who also supports the plan… (emphasis added in smug satisfaction) Oh, sorry, didn’t mean to interrupt. Please proceed, **doorhinge** … ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/196 "2015-02-06T01:49:52Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![D\_Anconia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@D\_Anconia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/D_Anconia)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/197 "2015-02-06T05:48:22Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > There isn’t much that could be done with FoxNews (sic) as they don’t use the public airwaves. However, should they air a Benghazi schlockumentary on the Fox network itself, they should be required to provide equal airtime to the offended party to rebut the false claims. The so-called Fairness Doctrine hasn’t existed since 1987. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 10:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/198 "2015-02-06T10:38:26Z")
> [@D\_Anconia](#): > > The so-called Fairness Doctrine hasn’t existed since 1987. :dubious: Right. “Should” is a statement of current law :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 10:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/199 "2015-02-06T10:44:51Z")
> [@BobLibDem](#): > > There isn’t much that could be done with FoxNews (sic) as they don’t use the public airwaves. However, should they air a Benghazi schlockumentary on the Fox network itself, they should be required to provide equal airtime to the offended party to rebut the false claims. So, the government is going to decide what is “true” and what is “false”? And your OK with that in a Bush/Cheney administration? Not me. > [@](#): > > In my scenario, Richie Rich could only contribute $200 to his own campaign, same as Tommy Poorhouse. > > I’m not as worried about social media tipping elections as I am television ads. Everybody knows that the Tea Party Facebook shares that your halfwit brother-in-law shares don’t influence many people. Let me get this straight. I, as a private citizen, can spend as much as I want of my own money advocating for certain political causes, lets say “abortion rights”, but as soon as I declare myself a candidate for office, I can only spend $200? Am I understanding you correctly? > [@wolfpup](#): > > Where does the First Amendment prohibit limitations on the corrupting influence of money on politics, as Jefferson and many others had feared? Except in the delusional brain of Antonin Scalia and his ilk? So, you’re an Originalist now? 🙂 I’m not sure I understand the question. The amendment says “no law”. It’s one thing to say “you can’t give more than X amount of money to Person Y”, but quite another to say “You can’t spend more than X amount of money on political speech”. That would seem to my untutored brain to be a “law” prohibiting speech. The 1st amendment has never been interpreted to apply only to speech that doesn’t cost the speaker any money. **elucidator** : I apologize. I didn’t realize that the numbers you used were NOT made up. May we perhaps see their source? ---
**Author:** ![doorhinge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/a5b964/32.png) [@doorhinge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/doorhinge)\ **Post date:** [February 6, 2015, 5:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967/200 "2015-02-06T17:51:04Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > …Right, [because it’s all equivalent](http://sunlightfoundatiion.com/blog/2014/10/28/dark-money-still-a-republican-game/). :rolleyes: You may prefer that the IRS, WH, DNC, MSNBC, etc. become the designated decider of which political free speech will be allowed in the future but I prefer more of a run-what-ya-brung type of political campaigning. Make your case, if you can, and let the voters, or those designated by the voters, decide. Lots of money has been spent by supporters of both of the main political parties. Currently, the voters have handed control of both Houses of the U.S. Congress to the Republican/Tea Party party. Some claim this is a result of money spent. I believe it’s a result of the failure of Democrat party leadership to meet expectations. And that opinion didn’t cost you one red cent. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/koch-brothers-to-spend-900-million-on-2016-elections/710967.md?page=11)