So it seems my diary has become the place where I follow the stories on how the FEC could still rule that the soft money donations to the section 527 groups could be made illegal. Someone correct me if I am wrong but I think that the FEC is made up of 3 republicans and 3 democrats who interpret the rules and laws then enforce them. The 3 republicans evidentially are all on board with forcing all of the 527's to abide by an individual donation limit (either $2000 or $5000 depending on the article) which would mean that groups like move-on would have to return any large donations that they have recieved. This would include any money paid to them by George Soros. But without one of the 3 democrats on the FEC going along with the plan the republicans cannot do anything.
Well from this article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21188-2004Jan15.html) it seems that the republicans have one hardline democrat who is likely on board to ban all of this soft money. Unlike the republicans who are supporting the ban as a political calculation, he just really thinks it is the right thing to do. But here is the kicker- the democrats know that this one FEC guy (Scott Thomas) is likely to ban the soft money so they have not appointed him to another term in the FEC, but he is still serving until a replacement can be confirmed. Here is where I read between the lines but the republicans control the Senate so I don't think that they will be in any hurry to confirm a replacement to the FEC that might rule in favor of allowing these soft money donations. So thats how it appears the republicans will do this. They will stall any confirmation of someone to replace Scott Thomas until after the FEC has already ruled that any soft money donations to the 3rd party groups would have to be returned. After that, even if the new democrat is confirmed the rules would not be changed unless one of the republicans also changed his mind.