South Carolina: Democrats call for runoff between Tinubu, Brittain in 7th Congressional District Primary | SCNOW

The South Carolina Election Commission may think Glora Bromell Tinubu avoided a runoff with Preston Brittain, but the state’s Democratic Party isn’t so sure and they may take legal action to correct what they say is a mistake. According to results from the election commission, Tinubu secured 52 percent of the vote in Tuesday night’s primary contest against the 32 year old Horry County attorney, who was well behind her with 39 percent; however, state Rep. Ted Vick still appeared on ballots across the state even though he dropped out of the race at the end of May following his arrest in Columbia and still garnered over 2,300 voters -- 8 percent -- but instead of counting those ballots the commission simply discarded them. With Vick’s votes included, Tinubu only had 49 percent of the vote to Brittain’s 36, which would trigger a runoff between the two on June 26.

Texas: Dice Roll Decides Election in Texas Town | Yahoo! News

The town of Webster, Texas, is rolling the dice on its newest city council member. Literally. After Diana Newland and Edward Lapeyre each won 111 votes in a runoff election Saturday and a recount confirmed the result yesterday, Texas election code forced the two to "cast lots." A nearby pair of dice settled the matter: Newland rolled a five, while Lapeyre came up short with a four. "It seemed odd, but after discussing it [with Lapeyre], we were just ready to get it over with," Newland said, adding that her opponent was gracious about his misfortune. "I could not have gone out and campaigned a third time, and we had already gotten people to come out twice, bless their hearts."

Egypt: Supreme Court to rule on disenfranchisement law today | Business Standard

In view of an expected ruling on the disenfranchisement law today, a number of political movements in Egypt have called for marches this morning to the Supreme Constitutional Court in Cairo suburb of Maadi. The SCC is anticipated to rule on the constitutionality of the Political Isolation Law, which would disqualify former Prime Minister Ahmed Shafiq from the presidential runoff election on 16 and 17 June if applied. The court would also consider the validity of the parliamentary polls. The April 6 Youth Movement has called on revolutionary groups and citizens to take part in a march demanding the application of the Political Isolation Law on all former regime members.

Greece: Election apocalypse: Greeks hoard canned food | Herald Sun

Nervous Greeks are withdrawing up to 800 million euros ($1.01 billion) a day and stocking up on canned food as they fear the country will be forced to leave the eurozone after this Sunday's election. Greek citizens fear the ramifications of a return to the country’s previous currency, the drachma, if the radical left-wing party and strong election contender SYRIZA wins this weekend. Bankers said daily withdrawals from the major banks were hitting €500-€800 million ($631.8 million-$1.01 billion), Reuters reported. Meanwhile, retailers say consumers are stocking up on non-perishable foods like pasta and canned goods.

Papua New Guinea: Australian help for Papua New Guinea election ‘unprecedented’ | ABC Radio Australia

Australian officials say they are providing an unprecedented level of help to Papua New Guinea as it prepares for this month's general election. PNG is now gearing up for its general election after a tumultuous year in politics, stemming from the long-running leadership dispute between Peter O'Neill and Sir Michael Somare over who is the legitimate prime minister. But preparing for the election is not a task the country can handle on its own.

The Voting News Daily: Fixing Citizens United, Who Benefits From Text Message Donations?

Editorials: Fixing Citizens United | Geoffrey R. Stone/Huffington Post

Any intelligent person following American politics these days should be deeply distressed by the ever-growing role of big money in our electoral process. The extraordinary concentration of wealth in the hands of relatively few Americans has completely distorted the nature of political discourse. As multi-millionaires, billionaires and powerful corporations are now free to spend unlimited amounts in order to dominate public debate, we have moved from a political system founded on the aspiration of one person/one vote to one increasingly founded on money/money/money. Of course, there are those who say that money doesn’t really matter. What matters, they say, is the quality of the candidates and the strength of their ideas. Unfortunately, in a world of high-stakes and high-cost media, this is nonsense. Speech matters. It shapes people’s perceptions, knowledge and attitudes. Why else would businesses spend billions of dollars each year on commercial advertising? Corporations and billionaires are not stupid. They would not waste millions of dollars to fund an endless flood of political ads if those ads didn’t pay off. They do. Money may not guarantee victory, but it definitely helps. Imagine a presidential debate in which the candidates were invited to buy debate time. Instead of the debate time being allocated equally, each candidate would bid for minutes, so the candidate with the most money would buy the most minutes in the debate. What would we think of that? That is effectively what has happened to our political system. This is a disaster for our nation. It alienates voters, enables a coterie of highly-self-interested millionaires and corporations to distort our national political discourse, and causes elected officials desperately to curry favor with wealthy supporters, often at the expense of the public interest. Read More

Editorials: Who Benefits From Text Message Donations? Everyone! | Slate

Campaigns and outside political groups can collect donations via text message, the Federal Election Commission ruled late yesterday. … Donations will also be capped at $10 per text, according to Craig Engle, a lawyer with Arent Fox LLP, who brought the new text-for-donation proposal to the FEC representing political consulting firms Red Blue T LLC and ArmourMedia Inc and corporate aggregator m-Qube Inc. But who does this help, and how will it affect the Super PAC-dominated campaign finance terrain? “The conventional wisdom is this in the short term benefits Obama more than Romney,” says University of California at Irvine campaign finance expert (and Slate contributor) Rick Hasen. “Obama has been raising more money from smaller donors and this is a particularly easy way to make a small donation to a campaign.” Except Mitt Romney’s campaign joined Obama’s in pushing for the FEC to make this ruling, suggesting there’s plenty of grassroots fundraising enthusiasm on both sides. Read More

Editorials: Fixing Citizens United | Geoffrey R. Stone/Huffington Post

Any intelligent person following American politics these days should be deeply distressed by the ever-growing role of big money in our electoral process. The extraordinary concentration of wealth in the hands of relatively few Americans has completely distorted the nature of political discourse. As multi-millionaires, billionaires and powerful corporations are now free to spend unlimited amounts in order to dominate public debate, we have moved from a political system founded on the aspiration of one person/one vote to one increasingly founded on money/money/money. Of course, there are those who say that money doesn't really matter. What matters, they say, is the quality of the candidates and the strength of their ideas. Unfortunately, in a world of high-stakes and high-cost media, this is nonsense. Speech matters. It shapes people's perceptions, knowledge and attitudes. Why else would businesses spend billions of dollars each year on commercial advertising? Corporations and billionaires are not stupid. They would not waste millions of dollars to fund an endless flood of political ads if those ads didn't pay off. They do. Money may not guarantee victory, but it definitely helps. Imagine a presidential debate in which the candidates were invited to buy debate time. Instead of the debate time being allocated equally, each candidate would bid for minutes, so the candidate with the most money would buy the most minutes in the debate. What would we think of that? That is effectively what has happened to our political system. This is a disaster for our nation. It alienates voters, enables a coterie of highly-self-interested millionaires and corporations to distort our national political discourse, and causes elected officials desperately to curry favor with wealthy supporters, often at the expense of the public interest.

Editorials: Who Benefits From Text Message Donations? Everyone! | Slate

Campaigns and outside political groups can collect donations via text message, the Federal Election Commission ruled late yesterday. … Donations will also be capped at $10 per text, according to Craig Engle, a lawyer with Arent Fox LLP, who brought the new text-for-donation proposal to the FEC representing political consulting firms Red Blue T LLC and ArmourMedia Inc and corporate aggregator m-Qube Inc. But who does this help, and how will it affect the Super PAC-dominated campaign finance terrain? "The conventional wisdom is this in the short term benefits Obama more than Romney," says University of California at Irvine campaign finance expert (and Slate contributor) Rick Hasen. "Obama has been raising more money from smaller donors and this is a particularly easy way to make a small donation to a campaign." Except Mitt Romney's campaign joined Obama's in pushing for the FEC to make this ruling, suggesting there's plenty of grassroots fundraising enthusiasm on both sides.

California: Uncounted ballots will settle Shasta County elections | Redding Record Searchlight

An estimated 13,075 ballots, the vast majority vote-by-mail, have yet to be counted in Shasta County, putting the results of some supervisor races in question. "We are all on pins and needles," said Cathy Darling-Allen, the county clerk and registrar of voters. The vote-by-mail ballots were dropped off last week at polling stations around the county and the clerk's office, she said. Poll workers reported around 5,478 absentee ballots turned in at polling places around the county. Others were dropped off at the clerk's office on election day or were older and had yet to be counted. Shasta County also has 575 uncounted provisional ballots, according to the California Secretary of State's count of unprocessed ballots Monday afternoon. Darling-Allen said her office had counted around 5,200 mail-in ballots turned in to poll workers so far.

Editorials: A step back on Colorado election rules | The Denver Post

It was perhaps inevitable that Gov. John Hickenlooper would sign a controversial bill governing public access to voted ballots that we and many concerned observers had urged him to veto. After all, the bill was vocally supported by elected county clerks. Not only do they understand the business of conducting elections better than anyone, they claimed the sky might fall if he didn't sign the bill. The governor obviously had reservations about House Bill 1036, which he outlined in his signing message, but they unfortunately weren't strong enough for him to defy the opinion of the expert Chicken Littles. Too bad. Colorado now has an election system with a privileged class of people — not only candidates but also political parties and representatives of issue committees that gave money to ballot measures — who may inspect voted ballots when everyone else, including the media, is excluded. Those of us in the non-privileged majority will not have access to voted ballots until after elections are certified — too late, citizen activists persuasively argue, for effective public oversight. Many of those activists, it should be noted, have followed election issues closely for years and know a thing or two about them, too.

Connecticut: Veto irks elections officials; law would have allowed fewer polling places | Record Journal

Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s veto of legislation that would allow municipalities to reduce the number of polling places for primary elections has drawn criticism from some local election officials. Senate Bill 218 would have allowed local registrars of voters to limit the number of polling sites for a primary election. Election officials said the move was necessary to cut costs for primaries, when fewer voters turn out. Connecticut has closed primaries, so only registered Republicans or Democrats can vote in the elections. Current state law requires that all polling places be open for all elections, but the issue came to the forefront during the April 24 Republican presidential primary. With just one party voting in a race that was all but wrapped up at that point, turnout was very low.

Florida: Voter Purge Adds to Debate Over Voting Rights Act | Article 3

In this firefight, the first shot was Governor Scott’s, the next belonged to the Department of Justice and the winner might just be the civil rights era Voting Rights Act up for Supreme Court review next term. What’s the story? Governor Scott’s chief election official announced Florida’s intention to sue the Department of Homeland Security for access to a federal database that would help state officials better identify and remove non-citizens currently on their voter rolls. Moments later the Justice Department counter-sued Florida for violation of federal laws. Why? Unlike other Southern States, from Alabama to Mississippi to Virginia, the state of Florida is not covered as a whole but it does have five jurisdictions subject to Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Passed in an effort to outlaw discriminatory voting practices that had been responsible for the widespread disenfranchisement of African Americans, Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act requires covered jurisdictions to seek preclearance from federal judges, or the Department of Justice, before changes can be made “to any voting qualification or prerequisite to voting, or standard, practice, or procedure with respect to voting.” Florida’s unilateral action was in violation of this act.

Florida: Gov. Scott: DOJ ‘stonewalling’ attempt to protect voting rights | The Hill

Florida Gov. Rick Scott (R) called his determination to remove ineligible voters from Florida's voting rolls "a no-brainer" on Tuesday, charging the administration with "stonewalling" the attempt. "We're sitting here trying to watch how we spend our money, pay down our debt, do the right things for the citizens of our state, and the federal government tells us, 'Oh, no, you can't do the right thing for our citizens and we're going to sue you,' " Scott said on Fox News. "It doesn't make sense." Scott announced on Monday that Florida is suing the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in order to move forward, in response to the Department of Justice (DOJ) filing a suit against the state over actions taken for the purging attempt. "This is protecting the rights of U.S. citizens and not diluting their vote by non-U.S. citizens," Scott said. "When non-U.S. citizens register and vote, it is illegal, it is a crime." Florida began purging county voting rolls this year in order to eliminate ineligible voters ahead of what will likely be a hotly contested election, but stopped due to the administration's protests.

Editorials: Montana AG Refuses to Raise Potential Winning Argument in Citizens United Case | 11th Amendment

Montana Attorney General Steve Bullock is failing to “do all he can” — as he has publicly claimed — to win Montana’s U.S. Supreme Court battle against Citizens United.  He has refused to put forth a possible winning argument in the case and he won’t explain why. According to a report published on Saturday by Russell Mokhiber in the well-established Washington, D.C. newsletter, Corporate Crime Reporter, AG Bullock’s office told a lawyer who filed an amicus brief in support of Montana that the attorney general is refusing to assert Montana’s sovereign immunity from suit, paradoxically, out of fear that the immunity argument could actually win the case. The case is American Tradition Partnership (ATP) v. Bullock which challenges the validity of the controversial Citizens United case as it applies to state elections and is now awaiting the Court’s decision whether to reconsider its 2010 ruling that struck down federal prohibitions of corporate electioneering.

South Carolina: Tinubu wins in Democratic nomination in 7th District after votes for third place candidate are disqualified | TheState.com

Coastal Carolina University economist Gloria Tinubu has won the Democratic nomination for South Carolina's new 7th Congressional District. Tinubu appeared headed for a runoff with Horry County attorney Preston Brittain after Tuesday's voting. But late Tuesday night the State Elections Commission said that votes for third-place finisher Ted Vick would not count because he had withdrawn from the race. That gave Tinubu the majority needed to claim the nomination.

South Carolina: Federal judge will not stop primary | Anderson Independent Mail

A federal judge denied a last-minute request to halt Tuesday’s primary elections. Five people who were thrown out of South Carolina’s primary had filed a request Monday in U.S. District Court in Columbia for a temporary restraining order. Judge Cameron Currie and two other federal judges denied the request following a 3 p.m. conference call with the plaintiff’s attorney and state lawyers. The judges will explain their denial in an opinion that will be issued later. The candidates in the lawsuit are Republicans Ann Smith, who was running for the Anderson County Council; Tommie Reece, who was running for state Senate in Greenville County; and John Pettigrew, who was running for state Senate in Edgefield County. They are joined by Democrats Bob Shirley, who was running for a state House seat in Calhoun Falls, and Robert Tinsley, who was seeking the solicitor’s office for Abbeville, Greenwood, Laurens and Newberry counties.

South Carolina: Justice Department sued over South Carolina Voter ID records | The Post and Courier

A national conservative watchdog group has added a new wrinkle to the contentious debate over South Carolina’s voter ID law. Judicial Watch announced Tuesday that it has sued the Department of Justice, saying it has not turned over public records related to its decision to block the state’s requirement that voters present government-issued photo IDs in order to vote. The Justice Department did not respond to a request for comment. Judicial Watch said it filed a Feb. 6 Freedom of Information Act request for the records, and the Justice Department acknowledged receipt of the request 10 days later. But the department still has not turned over any records, which were due no later than March 29, the conservative group said Tuesday. Judicial Watch filed a lawsuit against the department over the matter in U.S. District Court last week.

South Carolina: Will strange primary season lead to confusion at polls? | CarolinaLive.com

The stage is set for Tuesday's statewide primary, after one of the strangest campaign seasons in memory. Lawsuits, state Supreme Court rulings and ballot changes could lead to confusion at the polls. Signs will be posted at some precincts advising voters not to vote for certain candidates who were disqualified after ballots were printed. Other previously disqualified candidates will be outside the polls, doing petition drives. Hundreds of polling places around the state won't open Tuesday because no one is on the ballot. How that will affect voter turnout is anyone's guess. Election officials say turnout for a typical primary is about 15 to 20 percent of registered voters, but the decertified candidates and last minute ballot changes make this year far from typical. "Hopefully that won't deter anybody from coming out to vote," said Horry County elections director Sandy Martin. "There have been a lot of confusion with the candidates and various things, so it could have an impact."

Wisconsin: Canvass affirms Lehman recall victory for Wisconsin Senate; Wanggaard yet to concede | JSOnline

An official count Tuesday determined that Democrat John Lehman indeed won the Senate recall election in Racine, but Republican Sen. Van Wanggaard has yet to concede and is considering a recount, leaving the issue of Senate majority undecided. The seat's ownership, and Democrats' control of the Senate, remained an open question after the June 5 recall election. Racine County's Board of Canvassers said Tuesday the final vote tally is 36,351 to 35,517, yielding an 834-vote victory in Lehman's favor. The canvassers' official tally put Lehman an additional 55 votes ahead of last week's unofficial findings because one polling place did not report votes from a touch-screen polling machine, Racine County Clerk Wendy Christensen said. Lehman, who declared victory the morning after the election, said the board's findings reinforced his confidence in the win. Lehman is a former senator who lost to Wanggaard in the November 2010 election.

Editorials: The mother of the world: The birth of Egypt’s democracy | Al Jazeera

There is much fear and frustration about the unfolding presidential elections in Egypt. So much so that the astounding historical significance of the event and its widespread consequences for the rest of the Arab and Muslim world seem to have escaped us.  Analysts are asking: Has the revolution failed? Are people casting a referendum on the actual revolution when they select a formal Mubarak-era official as their top choice? Are the Islamists poised to take over Egypt and turn it into a theocracy? Is the military behind it all? Will it step in to establish "order" when people are finally tired of all these demonstrations and fear for their mundane well-being? Will the US, the Israelis, or the Saudis - with all their might and money - "allow" Egyptians actually to bring their revolution to fruition and thus effectively endanger their respective interests in the region?  People in and out of Egypt were naturally drawn to a crescendo, a bravura, where the first ever democratic presidential election in Egyptian history would be the final battle scene against the ancien régime. But once Ahmed Shafiq - a senior commander in the Egyptian Air Force and later prime minister for a few weeks - emerged as the main nemesis of Mohamed Morsi - Chairman of the Freedom and Justice Party (FJP) founded by the Muslim Brotherhood after the revolution - people began to wonder.

Mongolia: Ex-Leader Says Election Decision ‘Illegal’ | The Jakarta Globe

Mongolia’s former leader Nambar Enkhbayar said Tuesday a decision barring him from running in upcoming elections was “illegal”, as his corruption trial was postponed for the third time. Enkhbayar — who had planned to run in parliamentary polls on June 28 before being barred from doing so last week — faces five counts of graft dating back to his time as prime minister and president of the impoverished country. But on Tuesday his first hearing was postponed for the third time after he complained of not having enough time to go over the case files and because his lawyer had left the city. “The election committee denied my application to be a candidate. That was illegal so I gave a letter to the Constitutional Court to reconsider my candidacy for the election,” he told reporters outside court in Ulan Bator.

Senegal: Campaigns begin as opposition cries foul | AFP

Campaigning begins in Senegal on Sunday ahead of next month's legislative polls, with the former ruling party crying foul over corruption probes launched against key members after the election of President Macky Sall. Twenty-four lists of parties and party coalitions are contesting the July 1 elections, in which voters will pick 150 lawmakers for a five-year mandate. The polls mark the first popularity test for Sall, who won the March 25 presidential election run-off against Abdoulaye Wade, ending his 12 years in power. Sall's presidential coalition is favourite to win the legislative polls. But the former ruling Democratic Party of Senegal (PDS) has accused the new administration of harassing its members in the run-up to the elections.

The Voting News Daily: The Uniqueness Of The 2012 Election, Super PAC Mania

Editorials: The Uniqueness Of The 2012 Election | NPR

All U.S. presidential elections “are unique in some fashion,” says John G. Geer, a political science professor at Vanderbilt University. Sure, but what about 2012? What exactly will make the 2012 election between President Obama and Mitt Romney truly unique? For one thing, though the candidates have many similarities, as noted by NPR and The New York Times, there is a clear-cut choice between directions the country might take. And there are other — what shall we call them? — uniquities. Carol S. Weissert, director of the LeRoy Collins Institute — a nonpartisan public policy think tank in Tallahassee, Fla. — points out that the presidential election in November will be the first since the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court opinion that opened the barn door to unregulated spending in all political campaigns — but especially presidential campaigns. Read More

National: Super PAC Mania | Columbia Law School Magazine

he Supreme Court does not often become a foil for late-night television comedians, and the nation’s complicated campaign finance laws are an unlikely source for comedy. But there was Stephen Colbert on a recent episode of The Colbert Report opening with a mini-seminar. “Folks, it seems like these days, everyone is talking about super PACs, which, thanks to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, can collect and spend unlimited money on political advertising,” Colbert told his viewers, some of whom had already contributed to his own super PAC creation: Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow. Read More

Editorials: The Uniqueness Of The 2012 Election | NPR

All U.S. presidential elections "are unique in some fashion," says John G. Geer, a political science professor at Vanderbilt University. Sure, but what about 2012? What exactly will make the 2012 election between President Obama and Mitt Romney truly unique? For one thing, though the candidates have many similarities, as noted by NPR and The New York Times, there is a clear-cut choice between directions the country might take. And there are other — what shall we call them? — uniquities. Carol S. Weissert, director of the LeRoy Collins Institute — a nonpartisan public policy think tank in Tallahassee, Fla. — points out that the presidential election in November will be the first since the 2010 Citizens United Supreme Court opinion that opened the barn door to unregulated spending in all political campaigns — but especially presidential campaigns.

National: Super PAC Mania | Columbia Law School Magazine

he Supreme Court does not often become a foil for late-night television comedians, and the nation’s complicated campaign finance laws are an unlikely source for comedy. But there was Stephen Colbert on a recent episode of The Colbert Report opening with a mini-seminar. “Folks, it seems like these days, everyone is talking about super PACs, which, thanks to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling, can collect and spend unlimited money on political advertising,” Colbert told his viewers, some of whom had already contributed to his own super PAC creation: Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow.

National: Mystery of Citizens United Sequel Is Format, Not Ending – How Justices Rule May Be an Issue Itself | NYTimes.com

At their private conference, the justices of the Supreme Court are scheduled to decide Thursday whether and how to take a second look at the Citizens United campaign finance decision. The usual odds that the Supreme Court will agree to hear a case are about one in a hundred. This one is pretty much a sure thing. The justices have already temporarily blocked a lower court decision in the case. In that decision, the Montana Supreme Court seemed to defy the higher court by saying that a state law regulating corporate political spending was constitutional notwithstanding Citizens United. Two dissenting State Supreme Court justices said they would have liked to vote with their colleagues but did not believe they were entitled to ignore the United States Supreme Court. “I find myself in the distasteful position of having to defend the applicability of a controlling precedent with which I profoundly disagree,” wrote one of them, Justice James C. Nelson.

Editorials: Montana case gives campaign reformers best shot at undermining Citizens United | NationalJournal.com

The way conservatives tell it, President Obama’s White House tenure has resulted in a near-death experience for federalism. A tidal wave of Obama-inspired federal regulation has turned autonomous states into captives of the national bureaucracy, a perversion, they say, of the Constitution and the Founders’ vision of the “laboratories of democracy.” States’ rights, then, are of paramount concern for conservatives—except, it turns out, when the discussion turns to campaign finance and another principle near and dear to their hearts: free speech. As a case before the Supreme Court this month demonstrates, some on the Right might profess to love the 10th Amendment, but they’re willing to push it aside to embrace the First—at least in this context. The case, American Tradition Partnership, Inc. v. Bullock, centers on a century-old Montana law that prohibits corporations from spending money on political campaigns. The U.S. Supreme Court appeared to have rendered the state law unconstitutional in 2010 in its ruling in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission that allowed unlimited corporate and union spending on elections; but the Montana Supreme Court unexpectedly upheld the ban last year.

National: Mr. Romney’s secret bundlers | The Washington Post

The difference between President Obama and presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney when it comes to fundraising is not only that Mr. Romney managed to outraise the president last month. A more troubling difference is that Mr. Romney provided almost no information about the key “bundlers” who helped his campaign vacuum up such huge sums. This omission distinguishes the former Massachusetts governor not only from his Democratic counterpart but from his two Republican predecessors. Both President George W. Bush, during his two campaigns, and Arizona Sen. John McCain, during his 2008 presidential race, released lists of their key fundraisers and, at least within general parameters, some indication of their hauls. But Mr. Romney’s campaign has repeatedly dismissed suggestions that he follow suit. The campaign has said that it has complied with campaign finance laws, which do not mandate such information except in the case of registered federal lobbyists.

National: FEC: Campaigns can raise money via text message | Politico.com

The Federal Election Commission on Monday night unanimously voted to allow Americans to make political donations via text message, making Androids, iPhones and Blackberries the newest weapon in the battle to raise unprecedented amounts of money. Both parties, as well as campaign finance reform advocates, say the move will allow Americans of modest means to play a greater role in a democratic process dominated this election cycle by billionaires and multi-millionaires and political organizations such as super PACs that may raise and spend money without restriction. The decision will take effect immediately, although it may be days or weeks before the system is fully functional. Individual phone numbers will be capped at $50 worth of donations per billing cycle per political candidate or committee.