that will do it for us on kasie d.c. we will be back with you next week. up next a marathon of "american swamp." for now, good night from new york. a total amount of money spent in terms, $1.3 billion. >> so super pacs, 501(c)4s. >> florida $90 million. missouri $76. arizona, $66 million. >> 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 libertarian agenda of americans for prosperities founders, billionaire industrial brothers charles and david koch.

so who are the koch brothers? explain it to me. >> they are owners of the second largest private company in america. probably everybody has some product from koch 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 koch. >> 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 koch 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 ramped 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 steyer 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 $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 koch, 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 steyer and the koch 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. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance, so you only pay for what you need. i wish i could shake your hand. granted. only pay for what you need.

♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ my hands are everything to me. but i was diagnosed with dupuytren's contracture. and it got to the point where things i took for granted got tougher to do. thought surgery was my only option. turns out i was wrong. so when a hand specialist told me about nonsurgical treatments, it was a total game changer. like you, my hands have a lot more to do. learn more at factsonhand.com today.

like you, my hands have a lot more to do. ♪ i planned each charted course ♪ ♪ each careful step ♪ along the byway ♪ much more ♪ much more than this ♪ i did it my way (announcer) verizon is america's most awarded network and the only one with the galaxy note10 5g. right now, when you buy one, you get a galaxy note10 free. that's verizon.

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. ay. ♪ -i'm sorry? -what teach here isn't telling you

is that snapshot rewards safe drivers with discounts on car insurance. -what? ♪ -or maybe he didn't know. ♪ [ chuckles ] i'm done with this class. -you're not even enrolled in this class. -i know. i'm supposed to be in ceramics. do you know -- -room 303. -oh. thank you. -yeah. -good luck, everybody.

-oh. thank you. -yeah. the first survivor of alzis out there.ase and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. join the fight with the alzheimer's association. now, there's skyrizi. i have moderate to severe plaque psoriasis. 3 out of 4 people achieved... ...90% clearer skin at 4 months...

...after just 2 doses. skyrizi may increase your risk of infections... ...and lower your ability to fight them. before treatment your doctor should check you for infections and tuberculosis. tell your doctor if you have an infection... ...or symptoms such as fevers,... ...sweats, chills, muscle aches or coughs... ...or if you plan to or recently received a vaccine. i feel free to bare my skin. visit skyrizi.com. 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 feingold 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 years, 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 spigot 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/feingold. 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. excuse me, where is gate 87? you should be mad at non-seasoned travelers. and they took my toothpaste away. and you should be mad at people who take unnecessary risks. how dare you, he's my emotional support snake. but you're not mad, because you have e*trade, whose tech helps you understand the risk and reward potential on an options trade it's a paste. it's not liquid or a gel. and even explore what-if scenarios. where's gate 87? don't get mad. get e*trade and start trading today. you wouldn't accept from any one else. why accept it from your allergy pills? flonase relieves your worst symptoms including nasal congestion,

which most pills don't. flonase helps block 6 key inflammatory substances. most pills only block one. flonase. that's why with dell small business technology advisors. you'll get tailored product solutions, expert tech advice and one-on-one partnership. call an advisor today at 877-buy-dell. ♪ enterprise car sales and you'll take any trade-in?rom that's right! great! here you go... well, it does need to be a vehicle. but - i need this out of my house. (vo) with fair, transparent value for every trade-in... enterprise makes it easy.

following breaking news for you tonight. hurricane dorian crashes into the bahamas as a category five. dorian makes land fall. its slow movement here prolonging the catastrophic events. video posted by those on the island show flooded streets, docks being pounded by the 195 miles an hour winds and roofs being ripped off of homes. after dorian is done with the bahamas, the southeastern united states is the next target.

the storm skirting pretty close to the coast. then up into georgia and the carolinas. also the latest on the deadly shooting rampage in west texas. the death toll rising to seven people on seven with another 22 injured. this includes a 17-month-old girl. the suspect was shot and killed by police. he is identified as seth ator. no motive has yet been revealed. 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. >> is it ever to educate? >> all ads that work are not

about education and political campaigns. they are about emotion responses to particular situations that are 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. [dog barking]

[dog barking] [dog barking] [dog barking] [dog growling] [horn blaring] [cat meows] (vo) the subaru crosstrek. with starlink remote horn & lights. dog tested. dog approved. i can't believe it. that sophie opened up a wormhole through time? (speaking japanese) where am i? (woman speaking french) are you crazy/nuts? cyclist: pip! pip! (woman speaking french) i'm here, look at me. it's completely your fault. (man speaking french) ok? it's me. it's my fault? no, i can't believe how easy it was to save hundreds of dollars on my car insurance with geico.

(pterodactyl screech) believe it. geico could save you 15% or more on car insurance. it's been a long time since andrew dusted off his dancing shoes. luckily denture breath will be the least of his worries. because he uses polident 4 in 1 cleaning system to kill 99.99% of odor causing bacteria. polident. clean. fresh. and confident. you gotta start somewhere. i'm a reporter for the new york times. the when, the where bank statements, tax returns, it's out, dozens of copy records of deeds and reports. 1995 showed that he was bleeding money. go through it all, understand it all holy sh* number by number, brick by brick. that's when we realized. that's fraud. i built this empire and i did it by myself.

that's fraud. so chantix can help you quit slow turkey.rkey. along with support, chantix is proven to help you quit. with chantix you can keep smoking at first and ease into quitting so when the day arrives, you'll be more ready to kiss cigarettes goodbye. when you try to quit smoking, with or without chantix, you may have nicotine withdrawal symptoms. stop chantix and get help right away if you have changes in behavior or thinking, aggression, hostility, depressed mood, suicidal thoughts or actions, seizures, new or worse heart or blood vessel problems, sleepwalking, or life-threatening allergic and skin reactions. decrease alcohol use. use caution driving or operating machinery. tell your doctor if you've had mental health problems. the most common side effect is nausea. talk to your doctor about chantix.

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. you know, it doesn't have to be. why are people saying that to us? >> 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, mining magnets known as the copper kings literally bought and sell political services 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 treasurers 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. in 2015, the democrat, he teamed up with state legislatures on both sides of the aisle to make montana the most transparent. >> i'm in a majority legislat e legislature. >> it's called the disclosed act. it says if you are going to spend in our elections -- >> you got to tell us who you 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. let's take some of these steps,

transparency, at least. 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 boilermaker 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 neighbors. >> 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. and move with confidence. >> 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? g six miles at an amusement park... bill's back needed a vacation from his vacation. so he stepped on the dr. scholl's kiosk. it recommends our best custom fit orthotic

to relieve foot, knee, or lower back pain. so you can move more. dr. scholl's. born to move. it's an honor to tell you that [ applause ] thank you. liberty mutual customizes your car insurance so you only pay for what you need. i love you! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

the first survivor of alzis out there.ase and the alzheimer's association is going to make it happen. but we won't get there without you. join the fight with the alzheimer's association.

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 from being sold to the highest bidder, there's a lot more talk than action. in fact, we've 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 of the authors, john jay, and alexander hamilton. james madison's copy actually has an notations by james madison. >> it says right here, "mr. madison's copy." >> one of james madison's esstays, federalist number 10,

addresses the dangers of what he called factions and is cited on both sides of the campaign finance debate. >> so federalist number 10. >> he's leaving us alone with the federalist papers. >> among the advantages promised by a well-constructed immune, none deserves to be more accurately developed than its tendency to break and control the violence of faction. faction can be read as at whwha? >> special interest groups. >> this is basically talking about money and influence? >> money and influence. >> from large organizations? >> there are two methods of curing 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 control. >> what you're going to do is control its effects. >> control its effects. >> 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 finally get some answers about where they stand on campaign finance reform. >> can we grab you for nbc real quick? >> let me ask you a couple of questions about campaign finance reform -- >> we're going to an interview now. >> just two questions -- >> campaign finance, would you talk to us for a second? >> i have to go. >> talk to us about campaign finance? let's do it real quick. >> we want to talk about campaign finance reform. >> good. >> would you support getting rid of all dark money, all super pacs, in elections? >> uh -- i don't know. >> would you guys support any form of campaign finance reform whatsoever? >> there's always ways to make campaign finance reform better than what 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 improved. but nobody, republican or democrat, seemed prepared to

disavow outside money altogether. >> someone wants to advocate on an issue, you can contribute funds. i don't think there's anything wrong with that. >> i mean, i -- i don't mind it so much that money goes in provided you know every cent of where it is. >> i'm okay with that, a discussion on how we disclose it, if we could have better disclosure. >> do you think there's any chance this coming congress of seeing any campaign finance reform? >> the biggest hurdle is citizens united. i don't like the decision. i think we have ample control as legislative bodies how campaigns are run. >> two of the senators we contacted did invite us to meet with them. michael bennet from colorado, and kirsten gillibrand from new york. both later became 2020 democratic presidential hopefuls. you decided not to make any pac money in your senate campaign. >> yeah. >> why, how come?

>> corporations already have an outsized influence in politics. and i believe that our politics need to be returned to the people. >> would you tell the mike bloombergs and the george soross and the tom steyers to stop spending all that outside money? >> if we have publicly funded, yeah. the do-gooders, you can't spend any money, and all the others who want to continue the framework can, that's absurd. >> what would you say to people that call you a minute accurate, i'm not going to accept pac money in my campaign but -- >> i think there should be campaign contribution limits. i don't believe money is speech which is why i fully believe in publicly funded elections and certainly as a step in the right direction, campaign limits on contributions. >> why did you agree to sit down and talk to us about this? >> because i think if we don't fix our broken campaign finance system, we're not going to address all the things that americans need us to address in this country. >> are you optimistic that it will ever get fixed? >> i'm optimistic about everything.

but i think it would be hard to get this fixed with the current cast of characters in this place. there's a strong sense here that people don't want to unilaterally disarm the face of the money that's come in as a result of citizens united, which makes it very challenging. what i want to say is, 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 electors of the federal representatives? 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 lorded aristocracy, we're going to create a nation for the people by the people and try to protect this government against our worst instincts. >> yeah, but it won't always be protected. it won't always work. and sometimes it needs to be fixed. 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 that they could foresee anything that we have today. would james madison be on twitter? >> oh, definitely. >> eric, thank you so much. >> while the founders understood the danger of money in politics, they also knew that the right of the people to form groups advocating for their interests was the hallmark of a truly free republic. >> what they couldn't have known is 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 this swamp is donald trump profiting off of being president? >> this is not a campaign donation, this is a donation to his wallet.

>> vote of no confidence. is american democracy failing? >> did you know about the illegal ballot harvesting? >> congressional dysfunction. even when both sides agree, it's still gridlock. >> when donald trump said, we're like living in a third world country when it comes to our infrastructure, do you agree with him? >> i don't disagree. >> drain the swamp! good evening. i'm meteorologist bill karins with your 10:00 east coast time dorian update. we have the new path, forecasted intensity coming up at the top of the next hour. join me then and i'll give you all the latest. it is now beginning to move over grand bahama island, the eastern tip of the island is now moving into the eye. this is about as strong a storm as you'll ever see. 185-mile-per-hour winds and it is walking to freeport at 5 miles per hour. due west is the general motion. the forecast path from the hurricane center does have it over freeport for about the next 24 hours, and then that