http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A14871-2003Dec19.html
Here is an article talking about how the Republicans are asking the FEC chairman to rule that the section 527 groups are bound by the same $2000 dollar hard individual limit that any other pac is. This would have a massive effect on groups like Moveon.org that have been able to accept very large donations. Once again this puts Democrats in a tough position. The main thrust of the BCRA was the ban on soft money but the Democrats are much more dependent on soft money that Republicans are. Note that none of this would have anything at all to do with Dean's massive fundraising so candidates who have not opted out of financing would be particularly hurt by this. This has largely passed under the radar of this site but the ruling would dramatically affect the race. If the ruling goes against the 527's then all money collected in excess of the $2000 individual limit would have to be returned to the donor.
A couple quotes:
" The Republican National Committee plans to ask the Federal Election Commission today to ban the raising of $300 million or more in "soft money" by pro-Democratic groups seeking to pay for voter mobilization and TV ads in this year's elections.
The request marks a reversal of traditional Republican opposition to regulating political money. Democrats say the shift is motivated by the GOP's recognition that tougher regulation might work to Democrats' disadvantage.
The Republican request would restrict most political spending to "hard money" contributions, which are limited to $2,000 per individual to a federal candidate. The Republican Party and President Bush hold a substantial advantage over Democrats in raising such money.
....
The RNC letter to the FEC marks an unlikely political marriage of convenience between the GOP and such campaign finance watchdog groups as Democracy 21, the Campaign Legal Center and the Center for Responsive Politics. The groups have outlined a legal case against 527s in communications to the FEC, and on Thursday they plan to announce further legal action.
Conversations with some FEC members indicate the panel may be willing to take a tough enforcement stand toward 527s, both in response to a pending request for an advisory opinion and in broader rule-making. None of the commissioners was willing to commit to a specific policy, but Michael E. Toner, a Republican member, said that if independent but partisan groups are allowed to spend "hundreds of millions of dollars . . . a lot of people believe the McCain-Feingold law will be seriously undermined."
