the case is called mccutcheon the federal election commission the plaintiffs in the case are challenging the federal election campaign act on the limitations of individual contributions arguing that this limitation is quote unconstitutionally low right because we can all relate at how hot money gets what it's burning through our pockets the plaintiffs are implying that by limiting how much money you can give you are limiting free speech yes that's the whole money equals each argument again yes the now infamous citizens united case made the same argument this one however is a bit different because it takes citizens united to all whole new level so they go back in time for you a little bit. in two thousand and ten the supreme court ruled five to four in a case called citizens united v federal election commission the result of which remove limits on how much corporations can contribute to groups that are not directly affiliated with political candidates or national political parties this landmark ruling that made it ok for corporations to spend whatever their little corporate whores desire

. >>> the federal election commission reports that president obama raised over $738 million for the 2012ampaign. final pricetag for the entire 2012 election totals $7 billion. that's a new high. >>> but a new poll says trusting government is at a new low. 53% of americans say they believe the federal government threatened their personal rights and freedoms. >>> and that's your morning dish of "scrambled politics." >>> and now for your morning look at the weather. we turn to bill karins. good morning. >> good morning. this is a happy friday. >> it is happy friday. we have super bowl weekend. >> a lot to look forward to. >> good weather to look forward to? >> i don't know. that's not the point. good morning, everyone. we do have very cold air once again to talk about. we have snow chances over the next three days. some areas haven't seen a lot this winter. we'll start with the wind chill values in the midwest. just like yesterday morning, another painful day to be outside. minnesota, north dakota, south dakota, wisconsin, iowa, illinois. and now even down into indiana. your wind chills at

court, particularly with the negative impact of its decision in citizens united v. the federal election commission, which has wide implications in terms of... i see it as undermining democracy and promoting plutocracy, where wealth ultimately determines political outcomes. >> hinojosa: well, you know, i think that one of the things that you've done in this extraordinary curriculum of your life, which is really quite amazing, but again, i was really fascinated with you serving as an assistant special prosecutor for the watergate special prosecution force. i mean, u were, at that point, living in a moment in our country's history when... talk about corruption, it could not have been clearer, and at the highest level. and i guess, you know, having served there, having been through that, and then where we are now in these modern united states of america. so, progress? or entrenched divisions that are so deep and so profound and so entrenched in terms of money and elites and all that, that we're all, you know, we're all kind of victims here? >> well, we're only victims if we allow ourselves to be. ulti

this is not a very big ethics issue is very technical it's about the fact that the federal elections commissiont as a lawmaker you cannot solicit more than $5,000 from someone to give to win independence super pak. he asked eric cantor for $25,000... there is this element of eric cantor wanting to bring in younger blood into the party this was an advisory ruling is not necessarily the law that's frankly where some of this debate is going to take place how much trouble could he be in an ultimately? given that it is a technical issue he could get a slap on the rest i don't think anybody is talking about expulsion but the real damage is where we started you look at the two previous governors here in illinois you have shocked telling people i want to think about running here any republican or democrat will say there is a house ethics committee that is looking at the sky you cornered him about running for governor and t talked-about how this place needs to be cleaned up he has ethics on his wardrobe >> when you explain it it may not look as serious as what it comes down to but that is what people wi

hasn't officially launched a campaign, mayor booker filed a statement of organization of the federal election commissionlegal requirement to begin fundraising for the 2014 race. this is cory booker speaking friday night at the naacp awards ceremony. >> you all sit down. [laughter] i have this unfortunate experience. any time us are thinking i'm someone special, someone comes and reminds me. yet the spring or recipient named john lewis. i thought it was a wonderful thing. he said, i want to partner you with john lewis. i said, what you talk about, skip? john lewis stood on the front lines of the civil rights movement, staring down alabama state troopers for the cause of righteousness. he led the bridge read with his own blood, carried unconscious by to the church. he's a champion of the civil- rights movement. and then it switched to my segment cory booker at age 7 fell off his tricycle and scanned his knee. bleating his sidewalk read, it carried to his mama screaming like a little girl. i cannot escape the weight of history. and you'll give me this privilege. i should be standing here letting you all kn

. >>> the federal elections commission says 7 billion with a b dollars spent on the 2012 campaign. t the presidential election. it's all the candidates, parties and outside groups. >>> mitt romney's campaign quietly gave $90,000 to the red cross at the end of november. the donation was made about a month after hurricane sandy hit the east coast. >>> move over corey booker. geraldo rivera is considering running for u.s. senate in new jersey. the 69-year-old made the announcement on his radio show. >>> and bradley cooper is using his celebrity to draw attention to mental illness at a washington news conference. in his movie, "silver linings playbook" he plays a man with bipolar disorder. he and patrick kennedy are holding a news conference to talk about the stigma attached to mental illness. >> this is something that needs to be addressed. and spoken about. so that people can feel more comfortable to come clean. and pat solotano is a guy in this movie who we watch. we watch grow because he feels more comfortable. >> and if you read only one thing this morning, my must-read poses a com

joining me now to discuss the potential impact of this case, michael toner where former federal elections commissionirman and former chief counsel to the republican national economy, and pete williams. i have my own theory on this but there are specific questions. >> interestingly mccutcheon's lawyer is the same one that brought the citizens united case to the supreme court. basic question is is it constitutional to have this limit on what you can give every two years. they say, yeah, we understand the anti-corruption reason to have the individual limits but they say there's no such thing at play if you're giving to several -- if you max out on what you can individually give to a whole bunch of candidates. now the government's argument is that's just an end run around the individual contribution limits. then you can give to all sorts of people and have that money funnel back and it is a thing we don't want to have happen. but here's the thing. what mccutcheon says is, i think you should find these limits unconstitutional. i think you should at the very least, if you have a problem, you should go bac

real and functional enforcement, the federal election commission is designed for inaction and incapacity. it is by mandate three republicans and three democrats, and they require a majority to do anything, to either make a rule or do enforcement. so that means they can do the little things, but anything that has real meaning, and then obviously the thing we've been talking about, citizen funding. the other thing i make about, related to our irony, we weren't outspending anybody, right. we spent in the aggregate about $2.5 million across eight congressional races and this race in new york state. these are races in some cases $12 million, $10 million or $12 million were being spent when you include all the inside and outside money, so we weren't outspending anybody. what we were doing was we were lifting up an issue that was otherwise, that differentiated the candidates that otherwise was going to be ignored, creating the opportunity for that to then be engaged in the actual debate between the two candidates. and what we saw was that when that issue gets debated and engaged, the candidate

of the election commission, is it an archaic institution developed in the 1970's the cannot deal with the problems of today? there were obvious the proposals to abolish and replace it. the federal election commission has had to address its actions or inactions, which have had significant impact some larger questions, like whether or not for example certain organizations that appear to be engaged in this activity through the kinds of activity referred to are or are not federally registered will political communities that should be registered to the government and disclosing that activity and complying with financing. so, there is a broad series of factors that accounts for what people frequently take it to be. without any doubt it has contributed in it's shorthand form to the view that times have really changed. we are not sure where it will go or what it will mean for the campaign finance regulatory system and is not in some way on the current model to rehabilitate it. in the minds of people certainly signifies that we are facing a set of large questions in the united states. now, the question comes -- white, more specifically, as the laws develop, what role will they have in t

we from the chairman of the federal election commission and several scholars. this is just over an hour and a half. >> thank you, michael, and i am happy to be here at cato. i want to set up a description of the problem, and want to react to the characterization of that problem from this morning. there was a report that was published last week that tries to put the recent election in some context, and so this morning you heard the claim that effectively citizens united and the subsequent decisions represented no change. here is the outside spending before citizens united, and after citizens united. that is a distinguished -- that is a difference that even a statistician could notice. [laughter] also the claim that there was not much secret money. here is the amount of money per we have no way to identify who the donor was. that is also a suggestion that the existing system is good for the challengers, not so good for incumbents. the reelection rates have been going up in the senate, stayed the same in the house, and if you look at funding differences in the hou

that's according to the federal election commission.nd that amount, in case you're wondering, is equal to 28 787 boeing planes or 70 private islands or how about this, 50 billion polio vaccines. if you think that amount of money is a lot, well, it is expected to rise in the future. were you surprised by that number, wolf? $7 billion? >> that's not just for the presidential races. it's for senate races, candidate races, all of the races. >> but that's a huge sum that we're talking about. >> advertising executives, mass mailings, executives, political operatives, they made a lot of money last year. >> everyone says this, the number is only going in one direction, up. >> a lot of advertising. thank very much. >>> hillary clinton's tenure as the secretary of state officially ended a while ago. her last day on the job, though, was marred by a terror attack. we have the latest details on the u.s. embassy bombing. that's coming up. >>> and how does this sound? senator geraldo rivera? he says he's serious. you're going to hear why. >>> so john

the federal election commission filed a brief, just the government why the justice department filed a brief, and there was a solicitor general's brief. and i always thought as solicitor general that was a crazy thing do. i promised the justices in the supreme court as long as i'm solicitor general you're on going to get one brief on behalf of the government. it gets to that sort of thing when there's a dispute within the government whether or not some law is constitutional or not. i guess we are standing a lot of time on standing. for geeks like this it will be fascinating. it will be interesting to the justices. >> let me add one point. i think it's critical to the role of the court. in my view berry v. madison stands for the proposition that the the court has the authority out of all the institution and the the court have the -- law of the institution. for one reason only. they have a job to do. that job is resolving disputes between litigants who come in to court with a real lawsuit. and in carrying out that responsibility, they have to apply the law and the constitution is law. th

this whether a commission is going to do things -- let me point out in the aftermath of florida 2000, we set up the united states election assistance commission, a federal agency that is supposed to be doing this very thing. but that agency has essentially been without commissioners, no commissioners over the last year. we went through the election without it. we have a structure to try and deal with this. we just don't have the political will. republicans have blocked appointing people to the eac. so on the federal level, that doesn't seem like right now it's going to be a pathway to trying to get some major changes in our election system. it's going to have to be fought state by state and locality by locality. >> political science professor rick hasen from uc irvine. thank you very much for your time tonight. your perspective on this is very, very helpful. thank you. >> thank you. >> i think one way to watch this is to look at this in parallel with climate change. climate change is another issue on which the democrats believe the republicans will never do the right thing. that republicans on climate change are too close to petro interests, essentially

the purpose of that act is to make sure that for federal elections there would be a uniform registration process. it delegated authority to the commissionup a registration form, which it did. unfortunately, in 2004, arizona passed a law that added its own requirements requiring proof of citizenship in addition and above to those from the federal form. they thought that wasn't enough. they wanted more. and we, of course, objected on behalf of our clients because this placed a special burden on people in arizona versus the burdens placed on people in other states. it's unlawful, unconstitutional and contrary to the intent of a statute and federal law should preimpt a state law. they knew it when they passed it. this should not be a hard case. >> let me pop to the panel. i want to ask about the point barbara made about the federal law autoto preempt the state laws. we have a little bit of evidence from how they decided the affordable care act case which narrowed the commerce law piece. is this basically a state's right court? >> at the end of the day, chief justice roberts with an eye toward history avoided a partisan ruling, invalidating