Super PAC ads give wealthy loud voice in campaigns

Four years ago, candidate Barack Obama reshaped the presidential campaign by raising more money from donors who gave less than $200 than any candidate in history.

But analysts say the 2012 campaign will be dominated by wealthy corporations, unions and individuals who can anonymously spend as much as they want in favor of a candidate - thanks to how the Supreme Court decided the Citizens United case two years ago today.

The decision gave birth to a new type of political action committee, the super PAC. As thousands of Occupy Wall Street demonstrators in San Francisco and elsewhere protested the ruling Friday, analysts said it is enabling wealthy interests to be able to shape the political system like never before.

The millions of dollars spent fueling this winter's bloodbath of attack ads in the Republican presidential primary is probably just a sneak preview of a stream of ham-fisted political advertising expected this year - all the way down to congressional races. The super PAC war could be especially intense in California, where a redrawing of the state's political districts has put formerly safe congressional seats into play.

Through organizations with names like Winning Our Future, wealthy interests can furtively fund the type of nasty TV ads that torpedoed then-surging Newt Gingrich before the Iowa caucuses and later carpet-bombed South Carolinians with commercials calling Mitt Romney a job-killing "corporate raider" when he led the Bain Capital private equity firm.

At the same time, presidential aspirants can claim that they had nothing to do with the attacks because the presidential campaigns can't legally communicate with the super PACs doing the dirty work.

Still, the super PACs in favor of Gingrich and Romney are run by the candidates' former top associates, political pros familiar with their thinking and strategy. Plus, nothing is stopping the candidates from raising money for a super PAC that supports them.

In South Carolina, where today's GOP primary will be held, super PACs spent $6.9 million, while the campaigns of five major candidates spent a total of $5.4 million, according to the nonprofit Public Citizen.

The political carnage has so far been accomplished by just a handful of super PACs, which have spent $30 million to date, according to federal campaign filings. Nearly 300 super PACs from across the political spectrum have formed and are idling, waiting to spend untold millions.

Once it is clear who the Republican presidential nominee is, analysts said super PACs supporting Obama will kick into action.

"You will not be able to turn on a TV and not see political advertising," said Bill Allison, editorial director of the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan group that aims to make government more transparent.

"It will be a sewer," warned Palo Alto Democratic Rep. Anna Eshoo, who has been at the forefront of urging Obama to sign an order that would require corporations doing business with the federal government to disclose their donors. He's balked.

Congressional races

Neither Obama, who could raise up to $1 billion for his re-election, nor the Republican nominee will have problems rustling cash or media attention. But the super PACs also could vastly increase spending in congressional races.

"Where I think you'll have a bigger impact are in the Senate and House races, where you'll see the super PACs raise more than the candidates lifted," said Richard Briffault, a professor of law at Columbia University and a campaign finance expert. "And you're going to see it sooner than ever before."

In Southern California, three super PACs are backing Rep. Howard Berman, a Democrat who is locked in a tough, redistricting-inspired battle against Rep. Brad Sherman, also a Democrat, for a San Fernando Valley House seat.