Money makes elections go around. That’s nothing new. Political fundraisers are the only things more common in a campaign than stump speeches and kissing babies. {span}Like it or not, they make the rest of a campaign possible. They provide the capital to pay for ads on television and online, the buttons and yard signs that make the candidate’s name a household word, the travel from city to city and all of the other moving parts that keep a campaign machine on the road.{/span} {span}But some election money is hard to trust because it can be hard to follow.{/span} {span}When you are looking at the campaigns themselves, the breadcrumbs can be easier by design. You are supposed to know who is giving money to a candidate, either incumbent or challenger. There are rules to follow, forms to fill out and websites that post the data so anyone can track it. You can also track spending, so you can see not just where the money comes from, but also how much of it finds its way back to the same pocket.{/span} {span}Then there are the third parties. Political action committees always break out their checkbooks for election cycles, especially in midterm years. They exist to raise money and donate it to candidates and committees that support their objectives.{/span} {span}Super PACs came about after the 2010 Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, creating an entity with more spending power than a regular PAC and less association with the campaigns. Those taglines on ads about “I approve this message” don’t appear on Super PAC videos.{/span} {span}Why does this matter now? Because Pennsylvania is drowning in Super PAC money, specifically related to the U.S. Senate race between Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a Democrat, and his Republican counterpart, Dr. Mehmet Oz.{/span} {span}The Philadelphia Inquirer pointed to $34 million from the Senate Leadership Fund to the Oz campaign and $32 million from the Democratic Senate Majority PAC for Fetterman.{/span} {span}Is this legal? Yes. And by law, the campaigns aren’t even supposed to have any coordination with the Super PACs, so they can’t really be held responsible for anything the operations might do in favor of one candidate or in opposition of another.{/span} {span}But plenty of things are legal and not necessarily beneficial. Super PACs would fall into that category.{/span} {span}The Keystone State is already a playground for national political interests in this election more than the best interests of Pennsylvanians. The Senate race has become about a tug-of-war for power in the federal government, not what is happening for teachers in Pittsburgh, farmers in Greensburg or factory workers in New Kensington.{/span} {span}More than $60 million in outside money to sway Pennsylvanians’ votes just illustrates how much control Super PACs have in attempting to pull strings.{/span} {span}There’s nothing that can be done to stop it, but voters can do what they can by being active participants in the process. Push for answers over ad space and plans over politics, and maybe the influence of all that money can be mitigated.{/span} — Pittsburgh Tribune-Review via AP {span} {/span}

Money makes elections go around. That’s nothing new. Political fundraisers are the only things more common in a campaign than stump speeches and kissing babies.

Like it or not, they make the rest of a campaign possible. They provide the capital to pay for ads on television and online, the buttons and yard signs that make the candidate’s name a household word, the travel from city to city and all of the other moving parts that keep a campaign machine on the road.

But some election money is hard to trust because it can be hard to follow.

When you are looking at the campaigns themselves, the breadcrumbs can be easier by design. You are supposed to know who is giving money to a candidate, either incumbent or challenger. There are rules to follow, forms to fill out and websites that post the data so anyone can track it. You can also track spending, so you can see not just where the money comes from, but also how much of it finds its way back to the same pocket.

Then there are the third parties. Political action committees always break out their checkbooks for election cycles, especially in midterm years. They exist to raise money and donate it to candidates and committees that support their objectives.

Super PACs came about after the 2010 Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, creating an entity with more spending power than a regular PAC and less association with the campaigns. Those taglines on ads about “I approve this message” don’t appear on Super PAC videos.

Why does this matter now? Because Pennsylvania is drowning in Super PAC money, specifically related to the U.S. Senate race between Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a Democrat, and his Republican counterpart, Dr. Mehmet Oz.

The Philadelphia Inquirer pointed to $34 million from the Senate Leadership Fund to the Oz campaign and $32 million from the Democratic Senate Majority PAC for Fetterman.

Is this legal? Yes. And by law, the campaigns aren’t even supposed to have any coordination with the Super PACs, so they can’t really be held responsible for anything the operations might do in favor of one candidate or in opposition of another.

But plenty of things are legal and not necessarily beneficial. Super PACs would fall into that category.

The Keystone State is already a playground for national political interests in this election more than the best interests of Pennsylvanians. The Senate race has become about a tug-of-war for power in the federal government, not what is happening for teachers in Pittsburgh, farmers in Greensburg or factory workers in New Kensington.{/span}

More than $60 million in outside money to sway Pennsylvanians’ votes just illustrates how much control Super PACs have in attempting to pull strings.

There’s nothing that can be done to stop it, but voters can do what they can by being active participants in the process. Push for answers over ad space and plans over politics, and maybe the influence of all that money can be mitigated.

— Pittsburgh Tribune-Review via AP