$1.3 billion. >> so super pacs, 501c4s. >> florida $90 million. missouri $76. >> but, see, when i look at this, and maybe i'm idealistic. i think that money could be spent in better ways. that money could fund schools, hospitals. >> at the end of the day, do you know where all that money ends up?

right there. when we talk about the swamp, we're referring to that murky and often mysterious nature of our politics. and we want to know: can it really be drained? if so, how? >> you have heard it before. one of the best ways to understand how washington works and how it can be changed is to follow the money. for jacob and me, that means wading into that swamp and examining how big money is impacting our elections like never before. we're digging through opensecrets.org. but frankly, it is still bewildering. >> here is the thing.

we're only seeing part of it. we don't know the full extent of what money was spent and we certainly don't know who spent it. >> god, this is really intense. >> during the 2018 mid-terms, katie and i saw firsthand how campaign spending words were shattered with $5.7 billion spent. but it is not just the jaw dropping sums that got our attention. it is where that money came from. >> i recognize -- >> americans for prosperity. >> yeah. next gen climate. >> national rifle association. planned parenthood. >> the more you look, the swampier it gets. special interest groups and a handful of staggeringly wealthy individuals are buying our elections and it is all perfectly legal. >> you can go through all of this and name every single person who works in that building and show how much money is spent on them by outside groups. it makes you wonder whose

interests do they have in mind? the voters who put them into that office? >> it is time to put strict limits -- >> across the political spectrum, everyone says there is too much money in politics. >> billionaires are buying elections. >> i've got a lot of questions about where all that money came from and how it benefitted the people it was spent on. the obvious first step is to see if i can set up a meeting with any senators to talk to me about it. jacob calling from msnbc. sure. soboroff. it's a pass? hey, max, calling from nbc. will he be willing to talk with us about that? okay. thanks, bye. what do you know? it's not that easy to get a member of the senate on the phone. >> as jacob tries to get at least one senator to meet with us, i want to dig deeper into a type of political funding where

the original donors are almost impossible to trace. it's known as dark money. and there is one group whose name has become synonymous with that term. americans for prosperity. americans for prosperity is registered with the irs as a nonprofit social welfare organization. but it's actually the nerve center of the most influential fund-raising network in the country. jane literally wrote the book on dark money and the controversy surrounding these groups. >> americans for prosperity spent something like $60 million just on its own in dark money. they have built up this network of nonprofit groups that don't look overly political that push their political point of view. >> their mission, to advance the

conservative lib ratarian agenda of americans for prosperities founders, billionaire industrial brothers charles and david coke. so who are the coke brothers? explain it to me. >> they are owners of the second largest private company in america. probably everybody has some product from coke industries in their life. >> like what? >> they make everything from stain master carpet to dixie cups to georgia pacific lumber. but they are huge proprietors of oil. >> are they representing the interests of a wide group of the american public or are their interests, can they boil down to how much money it makes them? >> the cokes would say that what they are pushing is something that they think is good for all americans. but if you take a look at it, what you find is it's especially good for the cokes. >> the cokes declined our requests for an interview. but the reporting shows how

americans for prosperity used money from like minded donors to help shift u.s. policy and politics in their favor, promoting huge tax cuts for the wealthy, supporting anti-labor candidates, funding efforts to crush renewable energy and almost all of the money came from untraceable donations. flowing through the cokes complex dark money network. >> so you might see an ad and it's funded by one of those groups, but you wouldn't necessarily know that group had anything to do with david or charles coke. >> because a lot of groups have these very bland names, america future fund or americans for job security. who is that really? what you would realize if you go through the paperwork, it was like a daisy chain of money. and if you were able to trace it back, a lot of it would come from this group of 400 of the richest, most conservative people in the country who work

with the cokes and funded it. >> the may the coke rebranded with a new name, stand together. and in this incarnation, it says it's open to supporting democrats who are pro dreamers and antiteric. who matter what the name and reported orientation, it is sure to remain a potent political force. >> after dozens of phone call, i'm basically striking out. >> okay. it's a no. okay, thanks. bye. so far it's not going so good. the reason so many members of congress probably don't want to talk about this is because money equals power in politics. and to bite the hand that feeds you is probably not a good proposition to the people who work in that building. conservative fund-raising giants like the cokes are committed to giving their side the edge. but they are not alone.

if there is one thing that's bipartisan in washington, it's rampid political spending. mega donors gave millions to democratic candidates and causes in the past year. then there is tom steyer, billionaire founder of next gen america and need to impeach. a former hedge fund manager turned liberal activist, tom styier committed millions to three issues he sees as critical to america's survival, clean energy, voter registration and removing president donald trump from office. >> my name is tom steyer, i'm running for president. >> now he announced he is running for president himself, and he said he plans to spend 1$100 million of his own money, months before his candidacy he accepted by invitation to speak on camera. and i thought a certain well known washington hotel would be

the perfect place to talk to a man trying to get a president impeached. >> i'm so interested in people like you because you do have such a giant platform to influence american politics with the size of just frankly your checkbook. when you decide to spend money, are you doing it in a truly altruistic way? >> well, i'm doing it because i think -- look, i think what we're doing is consistently, intentionally, solely to push for, you know, a broader democracy. almost 80% of americans, almost 8 out of 10 americans believe that our system has been purchased by corporations. >> they believe money is a problem. >> and i agree with that. >> so someone asked you what's the difference between you and david or charles coke, what do you say? >> i say we're transparent. they're not. they have pushed very, very hard for things that are extremely good for their bottom lines, and that is a complete difference.

>> so you don't stand to make money off any clean energy. >> no. because what i did is i said if i have any clean money investments, i'll put them in a foundation. i have to give the money away, that i can never touch it legally. >> he says he's not profiting personally, but is a billionaire trying to bank roll the impeachment of a president really democracy? >> if the american public wanted to impeach the president of the united states, they will put significant political pressure on their elected officials. >> that's our total belief, too. that's our belief. >> but what do you say to those who hear that and they say to you, hey, you're one person putting a ton of money into politics. i'm still uncomfortable with that. >> look, i'm uncomfortable with it. i'm in favor of federally funded elections. >> are you in favor of campaign finance reforms? are you part of the problem?

>> i have disproportionately benefitted? definitely. i'm figuring out how to push that system back so it gets back to justice, a working democracy of mind for the people, yes. >> tom styier and the coke brothers are making their presence felt on the biggest stages of politics. but to see how the swamp is affecting people on an increasingly local level, we need to leave washington and head west. >> explain to me why all of your neighbors don't have solar like you do? >> because dark money succeeded in influencing the regulators. . oh delicious. or delicious... or fun. ♪ but since you need both car and home insurance, why not bundle them with esurance and save up to 10%. which you can spend on things you really want to buy, like ah

well i don't know what you'd wanna buy cause i'm just a guy on your tv. esurance. it's surprisingly painless. dto experiencer gthe luxury you desire on a full line of utility vehicles. at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. lease the 2019 rx 350 for $389 a month, for 36 months, and we'll make your first month's payment. experience amazing. and i don't add trup the years.s. but what i do count on... is boost® delicious boost® high protein nutritional drink

has 20 grams of protein, along with 26 essential vitamins and minerals. boost® high protein. be up for life. ♪ ♪ ♪

with money flooding our elections like never before, the impact of political mega donors is being felt throughout the country, from washington aheaded

to arizona to see how this ramped spending is affecting people's lives on a daily basis. >> this is one of two water treatment facilities in tempe, arizona. what is noticeable is all this solar. it turns out in arizona solar is the exception rather than the rule. only 6% of energy in arizona comes from solar, the sun aniest state in the union. it is directly related to the spending of dark money here. in 2014, a sudden surge in untraceable campaign donations changed the course of energy policy in the state. that money, more than $3 million, helped get two anti-solar power candidates elected to the commission that sets arizona's energy policies. as the new commission began rolling back solar power incentives, many believe the state's largest utility company was the source of that dark

money. why? because solar power threatened their profits from nuclear energy and natural gas. at the time, aps would neither conform, nor deny if they were behind the mysterious campaign contributions. but for one local politician, the answer was clear. >> we have to get closer to the sun. >> the vice mayor of tempe, arizona and a long time solar advocate. solar energy isn't just a political powerpoint, it is how she powers her home. >> explain to me why all of your neighbors don't have solar just like you do. >> because dark money succeeded in electing the regulators they wanted to have regulate them. >> and so you have to pay some kind of fee in order to have this today. >> i'm grandfathered in for a few more years, but yes. >> is it fair to say that in one of the sun aniest states in the union that dark money has

prevented solar power? >> i think that's true. >> after seeing the impact of dark money firsthand, she was determined to find back. in march of 2018, she got together with other local officials and led a successful bipartisan effort to get dark money out of her city's elections. >> so you were able to do something that not many people have done across this country, which is you have legislated or mandated the disclosure of dark money in tempe. >> we call it the sunshine ordinance because it was about transparency. i worked on a working group with the mayor and another counsel member. this is something the entire counsel supported. we voted unanimously to put it on the ballot. >> what did you think that 91.44% supported it? >> it was an unbelievable statement that voters want to be informed. they want to know who is behind the messages they see on tv and in the mailers. they want to know who is trying

to influence their elections. >> after passing their initiative by more than 90%, she was confident other cities would quickly follow suit. but in april of 2010, less than a month later, the republican majority arizona state legislature passed a bill banning local governments like tempe from disclosing dark money donors. >> that bill was drafted in large part by the american legislative exchange council, a conservative think tank that gets funding and guidance from the koch brothers and aps. >> the reality is as of today, as of this moment, if there is dark money spent in tempe, you are not necessarily going to know who is behind it, right? >> well, the problem is legislature passed a law to preempt it to interfere with it. they're telling us it is against the arizona constitution. so we're expecting to have a legal battle soon. we haven't yet. but we're fully expecting that to happen. >> despite the long road ahead,

she has vowed to continue to shine the light on dark money. >> the first amendment protects free speech. but what our dark money disclosure said is there is no right to hide behind that speech. >> in march 2019, private utility aps finally confirmed what they suspected all along. under threat of subpoena from newly elected energy commissioners, aps disclosed they were behind donations benefitting anti-solar candidates in 2014. the utility giants revealed it spent more than three times more than what was previously thought for a total of nearly $11 million. with dark money flooding into places like arizona, the swamp just keeps getting deeper. but it wasn't always this way. to get that story, i'm heading back to washington. >> what is the difference between what you are describing and money laundering? >> not a whole heck of a lot.

♪work so hard give it everything you got♪ ♪strength of a lioness tough as a knot♪ ♪rocking the stage and we're never gonna stop♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... just in case you forgot♪ ♪all strength, no sweat... ♪no no no sweat... liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, hmm. exactly. so you only pay for what you need. nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪

a cockroach can survive submergede guy. underwater for 30 minutes. wow. yeah, wow. not getting in today. not on my watch. pests never stop trying to get in. we never stop working to keep them out. terminix. defenders of home. terminix. defenders of home. ♪

♪ let's go! ♪ how do you figure out if donald trump has conflicts of interest? >> it is one big giant swamp. >> drain the swamp. you're watching msnbc. after seeing how even the sun drenched desert is drowning

in the swamp, i joined katie in washington to figure out how we got to this point. >> it is hard to believe now, but there was a time not that long ago when it seemed like congress had a handle on this thing. in 2002, democratic senator russ fine gold got together with republican senator john mccain to introduce the first major bill addressing campaign finance abuses since the watergate era. >> well, there was this law in place, the federal elections law for 20 or 30 yores, but a loophole had been created that was undermining the contribution limits that had been created by the legislation. so what it meant was this spigt wheel where wealthy individuals could give unlimited amounts of money. >> did you feel like it was a soft form of bribery? >> without a doubt. in fact, we called it legalized bribery. so john mccain and i decided we had to at least get rid of this

loophole. >> it also prohibited corporations and other groups for paying for tv ads in the run up to primary and again elections. >> real reform. >> but eight years later, the law would be all but wiped out by one of the most controversial court cases in american history. >> my name is david bosse and i'm president of services united. >> they produced a documentary called hillary the movie which slammed hillary clinton and planned to air it on cable tv just before the 2008 primary season got started. but a district court ruled that the film basically amounted to a feature length attack ad against clinton and airing it so close to the primaries would violate mccain/fine gold. they appealed to the supreme court and a decision few saw coming, the court agreed with citizens united ruling 5-4 that

corporations had the same rights as individuals. the court also ruled that political spending was a form of free speech. >> were you surprised by the decision on citizens united? >> i was shocked. i hadn't heard anybody really say that that was a legitimate thing to do. and, yet, the court went ahead and did it. >> the flood of political money unleashed by citizens united led to the rise of what we now know as super pacs. they can accept unlimited money from basically anyone, including corporations, labor unions and billionaire megadonors. donors names are disclosed and super pacs are not allowed to work directly with a candidate or campaign. >> i don't think there is any question. it's all a wink and a nod. these are former staff members who know exactly what to do. so the idea that somehow this is

separate, that it's independent is an absurdity. this is why disclosure is so important. the record is built. people can follow the money. at least super pacs are required to disclose the names of the donors so we know where that money is coming from. sheila is executive director of a nonpartisan research organization that tracks. the money unleashed by citizens united has flowed into nonprofit social welfare groups that are not required to make their donors's public. planned parenthood or the nra has a social welfare purpose. they're not organized primarily to influence politics, but they're allowed some political activity. >> there has been a huge spike in politically active social welfare group.

there are some that seem to have no purpose other than to allow dark money to flood into the political system. >> they sometimes are spending tens of millions of dollars, but they have no bricks and mortar. they operate out of p.o. box. these are the trademark qualities of a political community. >> what is the difference between what you're describing and money laundering? >> not a whole heck of a lot. we have tracked these money flows going through these very complex networks to in part erase the footprint. >> as if this isn't bad enough, these groups can can donate their money to anyone they want, including a super pac and still keep the original donors secret. >> how can we be assured that it is even domestic. >> what you are describing are all things that are threatening our democracy. >> a donation is not a bad thing. it is a perfectly legitimate way

to get engaged with your political system. the problem is that there are wealthy corporations, nonprofits, for profit that have far greater resources and are far more interested in using that money to get what they want out of our political system. >> after learning more about citizens united and its impact, i thought it would be hard to find someone who actually thinks this is a good thing. but i was wrong. bran smith is a former chairman of the federal election commission and a staunch advocate for even less campaign finance regulation than we have now. to get his take, i asked smith to meet me where money speaks loudest, the new york stock exchange. >> so you agree with citizens united. doesn't the decision effectively

say if you have more money, you have more free speech? >> if you have more money, you have more ability to go out and speak. i don't think there is any way that one can say that that's not the case. what the supreme has long said is that the government can't limit the speech of some people in order to try and enhance the voice of someone else. you don't want the government saying, you, george soros, you guys have spoken enough. but you people need to talk more. that's what we don't trust the government to do. >> but the disparity of wealth between people, it has gotten larger and larger and larger over the years. so the people who truly have the money and truly have the power, it is a smaller group of people compared to everybody else. >> i'm not sure that is true at all. but beyond that, let's think again. we're also not comparing the system to some pie in the sky ideal. we understand that democracy is a messy business. the best way is to hear a lot of voices. nobody should be shut down.

>> watch a sit come or turn on your television, period, during an election. every ad you see is from an outside group talking about a candidate. >> these ads increase voter knowledge, helps them know more about the candidates. >> a lot, though, are completely untrue. >> i don't know that you can say that. and, again, the question is, you know, do you want government making that decision? do you want government making the decision on what's fake news? do you want it making a decision on what ads are legitimate? >> it's hard to argue against more free speech in a democracy. but as jacob and i were about to see, in the heat of an election cycle, free speech isn't really free. >> so people with the most money have the most free speech? >> now people who can afford free speech have free speech. veh [alarm beeping] {tires screeching} {truck honking} (avo) life doesn't give you many second chances. but a subaru can.

(dad) you guys ok? you alright? wow. (avo) eyesight with pre-collision braking. standard on the subaru ascent. the three-row subaru ascent. love. it's what makes a subaru a subaru. that i won the "best of" i casweepstakes it. and i get to be in this geico commercial? let's do the eyebrows first, just tease it a little. slather it all over, don't hold back. well, the squirrels followed me all the way out to california! and there's a very strange badger staring at me... no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on my car insurance with geico. uh-huh, where's the camel? "mr. big shot's" got his own trailer. ♪ wheeeeeee! believe it! geico could save you 15% or more on car insurance.

cycle, free speech isn't really cycle, free speech isn't really

president trump announced he will nominate congressman john rad cliff to replace dan coats at the director of national

intelligence. he tweeted john will lead and inspire greatness for the country he loves. president trump further ignited controversy on twitter calling congressman elijah cummings racist. these comments come one day after the president referred to his direct as a quote, disgusting rat and rodent infested mess. for now, back to "american swamp." in american politics, a campaign finance arms race is escalating with no end in sight. now jacob and i want to see how super pacs and dark money groups turn their cash into action. these shadow campaigns don't literally buy votes or hand money over to candidates. but they do spend billions to sell their preferred candidate to the widest audience possible while tearing down their opponents. and the weapon of choice is the

attack ad. >> matt rosendale would make washington worse. >> to get a crash course in this dark art, we invited a veteran political strategist to our new york city headquarters. >> citizens united changed everything, made campaigning the new battleground for corporations and others to express their points of view without limitations. >> so people with the most money have the free speech. >> is the goal to manipulate the american public? i mean, what is the goal? >> the goal sometimes is to manipulate. the goal other times is to make sure people you don't want to turn out don't turn out and people that are angry turn out to make them do what you want to do. >> all ads that work are not about education and political campaigns. they are about emotion responses made clear in those ads. >> this is from florida.

>> how far out is andrew gillum? >> he's on another planet. he wants a government takeover of health care. you'd lose the coverage you have and you could even lose your doctor. >> we're losing radio contact. >> he supports closing our immigration enforcement agency. >> planet andrew, come in. >> if you look at this, they got him in green. not the best look. the imagery makes him foreign. they come up with arguments that people are afraid of that can be tested well. and they use it in a way that creates fear among people so they have to take action. in the case of gillum, an ad like that goes to health care. we have an aging population and an immigrant population people are afraid of. take two or three factoids that may or may not be related and create sense of fear and anger and you got it. it also comes in triplets really

where you say he's a dog, a chicken and a horse. you can't defend against three. >> after meeting with hank, it was pretty clear the super pacs will spend whatever it takes to get their message out. nowhere was this more apparent than the 2018 midterms. of the record shattering $5.7 billion spent, almost $3 billion of that went to tv ads. >> why don't you y'all get out and fire ted cruz? y'all hear me? >> to find out who the biggest spenders were, i went back to d.c. to dig deeper with our nbc politics team. >> the reason i wanted to dug you guys is i would get these regular e-mails from the campaign and it looked like you were tracking every ad on television. what did you do? >> let's show you. this software tracks every

single ad that airs by topic, how much money has been spent on individual ads and every day basically in realtime we would get updates of what was airing throughout the country. >> this allows us to get a good picture of what they were spending in these races. >> outside spenders on both sides waged an all out warfare totals 3.5 million times during the 28 cycles. but at the end of the day, it was democrats who went into overdrive, outspending republicans by more than $70 million. >> think about outside money in particular. for whatever reason in my mind i think republicans, the koch brothers, unlimited spending. but democrats spent more this time around. >> it is a case you saw it reflected in the election results. about 80% to 90% of these races, the candidate who spent more money won. >> that's wild. i mean, you guys have tracked this for multiple election cycles. how is it changing?

more and more money every election? >> it is more and more money and of course the age of the super pacs where we start to see so much. this will be existing in the 2020 and it will take new laws or a new supreme court ruling to really change the terrain here. >> for his part, president trump's campaign says they're planning to raise $1 billion for his re-election. the more katie and i learned, the more keeping deep pockets and dark money out of our elections was feeling like a lost cause. but we heard that 2,000 miles west, there was actually signs of hope. next stop montana. >> how do you drain a swamp? maybe it's one bucket at a time. . nice. but, uh... what's up with your... partner? not again. limu that's your reflection. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty ♪

♪ ♪ ♪ woman: (on phone) discover. hi.

do you have a travel card? yep. our miles card. earn unlimited 1.5 miles and we'll match it at the end of your first year. nice! i'm thinking about a scuba diving trip. woman: ooh! (gasp) or not. you okay? yeah, no, i'm good. earn miles. we'll match 'em at the end of your first year. at their reddest, ripest, they make everything better. like our strawberry poppyseed salad and new strawberry summer caprese salad. strawberry season is here. panera. food as it should be. i get to select my room from the floor plan... when i book at hilton.com free wi-fi... ...and the price match guarantee. so with hilton there is no catch. yeah the only catch is i'm never leaving. no i'm serious, i live here now. book at hilton.com and get the hilton price match guarantee.

this inot this john smith smith. or this john smith. or any of the other hundreds of john smiths that are humana medicare advantage members. no, it's this john smith, who met with humana to create a personalized care plan. at humana, we have more ways to care for your health, and we find one that works just for you. no matter what your name is. my car insurance, so i only pay for what i need. and this is me now! any physical changes to this man's appearance are purely coincidental. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ with a waive of candidates

starting to fill their war chest for a 2020 presidential run, the swamp of big money politics continues to rise. but far from the spotlight of washington, d.c., one state is taking matters into its own hands. with the governor committed to transparency and some of the strictest campaign finance laws in the nation, montana is fighting back against the corrupting forces of political spending and winning. >> over the course of this journey that katie and i have been on to look at the influence of money in politics has been pretty depressing, but everybody says, go to montana and talk to the governor. >> i think because we have showed in montana that at the end of the day we could still make it so elections are about people. we experienced what happened in our history. if you're not going to stand up to corporate spending. >> montana's fight to get big money out of politics goes back more than 100 years. at the turn of the 20th century,

the copper kings literally bought and sell political sufss until the people of montana demanded change. >> in 1906, the corporations shall control the people or the people shall control the corporations. so all of that was the tipping point where montana had said enough. it was called the corrupt practice act of 1912. it made it to corporate tresh eyes couldn't spend or contribute in our elections. >> stood for 20 years. reopening the flood gates to corporate spending and a tidal wave of dark money. >> every other state more or less said game over after the citizens united decision. every other state ended up getting knocked down by the supreme court saying there is nothing more than we can do. but the governor was determined

to make sure montana knew who was trying to buy their elections. he teamed up with state l legislatures on both sides of the aisle to make montana the most transparent. >> it's called the disclosed act. it says if you are going to spend in our elections -- >> you got to el us wtell us wh are. >> when i was running for election in 2016, americans were prosperity were putting all kinds of, you know, postcards, talking about what a horrible human being i was. 90 days out, they stopped. if we could stop afc and the koch brothers in montana, we can stop them anywhere. >> how do we get out of the swamp. >> how do you eat an elephant? one bite at a time. how do you drain a swamp? maybe it's one bucket at a time. adding sunshine. and it's something states can do

and the federal government could do if they had the will. >> the governor, who has also thrown his hat into the presidential ring hasn't been alone in his efforts to fight dark money. montana has a citizen legislature. all elected members have full-time jobs outside of politics. >> hey, man. are you a member of the senate? >> yes. >> so are you in session right now? >> we just finished. >> what is your other job? >> i work doing a leadership development program. >> it's not just the fact montana's legislatures have day jobs that sets them apart. >> i'm a boil r maker by trade. >> i'm a chemist for the state of montana. >> they have also got the lowest individual political contribution limits in the nation. >> i just finished running for re-elections and i raised $47,000. $180 at a time. that's our limit. >> raised less than $7,000.

knocking on doors of my naibs. >> mine was the biggest spender. the two of us were the big spenders. >> what was yours? >> i raised about $45,000. >> how about you? >> $22,000. >> i mean, i think the people that hear us have this conversation say, but, yeah, corporate influence in politics is so big and so strong, it will never make a difference raising $180 at a time. i think here in montana because of the huge transparency measures, we have been able to push back on that. some of these larger pacs and corporations don't even engage in montana's politics anywhere because they don't want to go through the strict scrutiny we have set and you have to go through now. >> the agency keeping watch over all political spending in montana is just across the street from the state house. this house could be a lot smaller, but the responsibilities of those inside are huge. as the one and only commissioner of political practices, jeff

mangin, along with his chief counsel are tasked with enforcing montana's tough campaign finance laws. >> so all the money that goes into the elections in the state of montana funnels through this little house? >> it passes through on paper or electronic form. each and every day through here. >> how much money are we talking about? >> it depends on each election cycle. but i would say hundreds of millions of dollars. >> probably. >> but it's not just enforcing montana's laws, it's defending them when they come under attack. >> we have ongoing litigation. i have a u.s. supreme court briefcase on my desk right now. >> talk to me about that case. >> it's a challenge to the disclose act that's made its way up to the u.s. supreme court. we actually have two up there this season. >> in addition to the disclose act, several conservative groups have challenged montana's contribution limits law. both challenges were crafted by james bob jr., the same lawyer who successfully argued citizens

united before the supreme court in 2010. >> if the supreme court hears these rules, then other states may very well move forward and do what you you did here. >> right. they could breathe a sigh of relief. >> not long after i left montana, the supreme court decided not to review the challenges to montana's campaign contribution limits or the disclose act, meaning both will remain the law in montana. now the question is will other states follow montana's lead on campaign finance reform? and more importantly, will congress? >> would you support getting rid of all dark money, all super pacs in elections? ons?r strengt! whoo-hoo! great-tasting ensure. with nine grams of protein and twenty-six vitamins and minerals. ensure, for strength and energy.

woman 1: this... woman 2: ...this... man 1: ...this is my body of proof. man 2: proof of less joint pain... woman 3: ...and clearer skin. man 3: proof that i can fight psoriatic arthritis... woman 4: ...with humira. woman 5: humira targets and blocks a specific source of inflammation that contributes to both joint and skin symptoms. it's proven to help relieve pain, stop further irreversible joint damage, and clear skin in many adults. humira is the number one prescribed biologic for psoriatic arthritis. (avo): humira can lower your ability to fight infections. serious and sometimes fatal infections, including tuberculosis, and cancers, including lymphoma, have happened, as have blood, liver, and nervous system problems, serious allergic reactions, and new or worsening heart failure. tell your doctor if you've been to areas where certain fungal infections are common

and if you've had tb, hepatitis b, are prone to infections, or have flu-like symptoms or sores. don't start humira if you have an infection. woman 6: ask your rheumatologist about humira. woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com to see proof in action. woman 7: go to mypsaproof.com dto experiencer gthrilling performance. now, at the lexus golden opportunity sales event. get 0.9% apr for 60 months on all 2019 models. experience amazing at your lexus dealer.

with some of the strictest

campaign finance laws in the nation, montana is winning the fight to keep big money out of their elections. but back in washington, d.c., when it comes to protecting our democracy being sold to the highest bidder, there is a lot more talk than action. in fact, we have been talking about it for more than 200 years. >> hi. >> hi. >> some of the earliest writings to tackle the subject are held here at the library of congress. >> thanks for having us. >> today we know them as the federalist papers. >> so, there were three authors. we have james madison was one ought authors. john j. and alexander hamilton. >> james madison's copy actually has annotations by james madison. >> it says right here, mr. madison's copy. >> one of james madison's essays, federalist number 10, addresses the dangers of what he called factions and is often cited by people on both sides of the campaign finance debate.

>> okay. thanks. >> federalist number 10? he is leaving us alone with the federalist papers. >> among the events promised by a well constructed union, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. faction can be read as what? >> special interest groups. >> so this is basically talking about money and influence and large organizations? >> there are two methods of cures the mischiefs of faction, the one by removing its causes, the other by controlling its effects. by removing its causes, how do you do that? you can't remove the causes of -- >> human nature. >> human nature or faction. right. >> i think you can control its effects. >> yeah. >> today the men and women entrusted with controlling the effects of money in politics are our elected leaders. we didn't have much success trying to get members of the

senate to meet with us. but we were still determined to get some answers on where they stand on campaign finance reform. >> can we ask you questions about campaign finance reform? >> we're in an interview right now. >> oh, you are, it's two questions. >> we have questions about campaign finance reform. >> can etalk to you about campaign refinance? >> let's do it, real quick. we want to talk to you about campaign finance reform. >> good. >> would you support getting rid of all the dark money on super pacs in elections? >> ah, i don't know. >> would you guys support any campaign finance reform? >> there is always way 's the make campaign finance reform to make it better than it is today? >> when we finally got some senators to stop and speak with us. just about all of them thought the system could be approved. nobody republican or democrat seemed to disavow outside money all together. >> someone wants to advocate on

the issue, you can contribute funds and i don't think there is anything wrong with that. >> i don't mind it so much if money goes in provided you know every second where it is. >> i'm okay with a discussion on how we disclose it can have better disclosure. >> do you think there is any plans for campaign reforms in. >> the biggest hurdle is citizens youfied. i don't like the decision. i think we have ample authority as legislative bodies to control how campaign finance is run. >> do you have any chance of it being overturned? >> no, i don't think so. >> two soft senators we contacted did invite us to meet with them. michael bennet of colorado and kirsten gilldebrand from new york. both later became democratic hopefuls. you decided not to take pac mo inin your campaign. why? how come? >> yes. corporations already have an outside influence in politics

and i believe that our politics need to be returned to the people. >> would you tell the mike bloom bergs and george soros' to stop spending outside money? >> if we have publicly funded elections. you can't say all the do gooders, you can't spend any money and all the other was want to continue the current framework can, that's absurd. >> what would you say to people that call you a hypocrite if you stand up and say i don't accept campaign money in my campaign? >> i think there should be limits. i don't believe in funding speech. i believe in publicly funded direction campaign limits on contributions. >> why did you agree to sit down and talk to us about this? >> i think if we don't our broken finance system, we're not going to address all the things that americans need us to address in this country. >> are you optimistic it will ever get fixed? >> i'm optimistic on everything. i think it will be happened to get this fixed with the current cast of clarkers in this place.

there is a strong sense here that people don't want to eun new laterally evasive money that's come in as a result of citizens united. which makes it very challenging. what i want to say that it will not fix itself. this has to be an engagement by american citizens in their democracy. >> which brings us back to the core principles this nation was founded on or as james madison wrote. who are to be the eleblgors. not the rich, more than the poor. not the learned more than the ignorant so what they're doing is saying we don't want to be ruled by a lorded arising tocracy. we will create a nation for the people by the people and protect this government against our worst instinct. >> yeah, it won't alms business protected. it won't always work and sometimes it needs to be fixed and today again might be one of those days. we just don't know how exactly

they would want it to be fixed. >> i can't imagine they would want to foresee anything we have today. would james madison be on twitter? >> oh, definitely. >> eric. >> it was a pleasure. >> thank you so much. >> reporter: while the founders understood the dangers and money in politics, they understood the people advocating for their interests was the hallmark of a truly free republic. >> reporter: what they couldn't have san antonio just how much power those groups and all that money would wield today. which is why we, the people, need to stay informed and vigilant if we're ever going to reclaim our democracy and get out of the swamp. coming up on the next episodes of american swamp. >> is donald trump profiting off of being president? >> a lot of campaign donations. this is a donation. >> vote of no confidence. is american democracy failing?

>> did you know about the illegal ballot harvesting? >> and congressional dysfunction. even when both sides agree, there is still gridlock. >> when donald trump said we're living in a third world country when it comes to our infrastructure, do yous a agree with him? >> i don't disagree. >> drain the swamp. > . >> i come before you as a member of a new generation, ready to step into the highest levels of american leadership. >> a young candidate with a standout pedigree. >> maltese left handed gay wore veteran. >> in a crowd of presidential contenders trying to unseat donald trump. i mean, why you? why are you the guy to take him down? >> i don't think it's someone different. >> he's a polite mid-westerner exchanging a proceed. >> you won't see me exchanging love letters on white house letterhead with a brutal