Canadian Biz Gives $1 mill to Mittens Super Pac

[tay]

Canadian-Owned Firm Gives $1 Million to Romney Super-PAC, Raising Red Flags

Foreigners aren't allowed make campaign donations. But post-Citizens United, the rules have gotten hazy.




Restore Our Future, the super-PAC supporting Republican Mitt Romney's run for president, received a $1 million donation in mid-August from reinsurance company OdysseyRe of Connecticut, a "wholly-owned subsidiary" of Canadian insurance and investment management giant Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited.

Fairfax Financial's founder is Indian-born V. Prem Watsa. Watsa serves as CEO and chairman and owns or controls 45 percent of the company's shares. He is also the chairman of the board of OdysseyRe, the American subsidiary.

The law says that any foreign national is prohibited from "directly or indirectly" contributing money to influence US elections. That means no campaign donations, no donations to super-PACs, and no funding of political advertisements

But campaign finance law is not as clear for US subsidiaries of foreign companies as it is for individuals.


Foreign-Owned Firm Gives $1 Million to Romney Super-PAC | Mother Jones

 

[WLDB]

If I were an American I'd be pissed off at this. If it happened here I'd be pissed. Foreign money should not be allowed to interfere in any election.

 

[TenPenny]

It's a Connecticut company, says so right there in the story.

 

[PoliticalNick]

If I were an American I'd be pissed off at this. If it happened here I'd be pissed. Foreign money should not be allowed to interfere in any election.

No corporate money should be in any election. Only those that vote should have any rights to donate or sponsor a candidate and corporations dont vote.

 

[CDNBear]

It was a donation by an American company to independent expenditure only committee.

Where did the red flag come from?

Someone making things up by connecting dots with a paint roller and playing fast and loose with reality?

 

[WLDB]

It's a Connecticut company, says so right there in the story.

But owned by a Canadian one. It'd be like Tim Horton's giving money here. Yes, Canadian started but now its American owned.

No corporate money should be in any election. Only those that vote should have any rights to donate or sponsor a candidate and corporations dont vote.

Agreed.

 

[CDNBear]

But owned by a Canadian one. It'd be like Tim Horton's giving money here. Yes, Canadian started but now its American owned.

But still a stand alone entity.

WalMart Canada is a whole owned subsidiary of WalMart USA. But to protect the corporate parent, they are separated legally, and act autonomously.

Agreed.

I would too, if it were applicable in this case.

 

[taxslave]

No corporate money should be in any election. Only those that vote should have any rights to donate or sponsor a candidate and corporations dont vote.

Presumably that would eliminate union donations as well. Or labour in kind.

 

[PoliticalNick]

Presumably that would eliminate union donations as well. Or labour in kind.

Definitely. I would say only individual voters can donate and only to a maximum of $1000-$1500 each. That way nobody can buy any undue influence.

 

[Walter]

Canadian-Owned Firm Gives $1 Million to Romney Super-PAC, Raising Red Flags

Foreigners aren't allowed make campaign donations. But post-Citizens United, the rules have gotten hazy.




Restore Our Future, the super-PAC supporting Republican Mitt Romney's run for president, received a $1 million donation in mid-August from reinsurance company OdysseyRe of Connecticut, a "wholly-owned subsidiary" of Canadian insurance and investment management giant Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited.

Fairfax Financial's founder is Indian-born V. Prem Watsa. Watsa serves as CEO and chairman and owns or controls 45 percent of the company's shares. He is also the chairman of the board of OdysseyRe, the American subsidiary.

The law says that any foreign national is prohibited from "directly or indirectly" contributing money to influence US elections. That means no campaign donations, no donations to super-PACs, and no funding of political advertisements

But campaign finance law is not as clear for US subsidiaries of foreign companies as it is for individuals.


Foreign-Owned Firm Gives $1 Million to Romney Super-PAC | Mother Jones

Hammer and sickle journalists at MJ.

 

[TenPenny]

But owned by a Canadian one. It'd be like Tim Horton's giving money here. Yes, Canadian started but now its American owned.

You'd have to ****yze the citizenship of the shareholders in order for that statement to have any veracity.

If your reasoning is that corporations have to have a certain percentage of American ownership to be allowed to contribute, what would you say about an individual voter who owes money to foreigners? Should they be considered foreign owned people?

Definitely. I would say only individual voters can donate and only to a maximum of $1000-$1500 each. That way nobody can buy any undue influence.

It would eliminate most advertising as well, since a lot of it is paid for by PACs.

Not a bad thing, either.

 

[Tonington]

Umm, I work for a subsidiary. We're not independent of Switzerland, where the corporation headquarters are. We don't get to simply decide what projects we will work on, which projects we will add to our portfolio. Business decisions are made from the top...this is, as the article describes it, a blurry line.

ETA: In fact, I'll even give an example of how this is blurry. We know that under Republican controlled government, the FDA produces fewer warning letters to pharmaceutical operations. Republicans typically cut back on regulations and regulatory efforts. So, if there was an operation in our American subsidiary that was performing poorly, and under greater scrutiny from the FDA, it makes great business sense for the Swiss company to funnel money through the American subsidiary to try and elect a Republican. The American plant shutting down production impacts the global business directly.

So, is the business environment of a Swiss reporting corporation something that should outweigh the concerns of American consumers of our products? This is where the line is blurry. There are contradictory principles operating here. On the one hand, foreign interests are rightly banned from donating to political campaigns in US elections. On the other hand, subsidiary corporations are not independent entities that operate outside the umbrella of the larger corporation that owns them.

 

[B00Mer]

This is not an unusual practice, plenty of Delaware companies that are owned by Canadian entities donate to Obama or Romney camps.

Corporations are legal entities, so can donate to political campaigns ..

I think why the OP started this thread was because the company donated to Romney, if the donation was to Obama, there would have been no thread..

This thread is allot to do about nothing...

.
.
.
.

 

[Highball]

Many large conglomerates from around the world are now donating to the Elect Romney Campaign. I guess they are finally seeing some real leadership skills emerging. Obummer's troop is now begging for funds donations to "Save the Middle Class!" They are even touring the University Campus telling students if they don't get re-elected the student assistance programs will disappear. Fear mongering worked in the 1930's central Europe. Hopefully not here.

 

[B00Mer]

Many large conglomerates from around the world are now donating to the Elect Romney Campaign. I guess they are finally seeing some real leadership skills emerging. Obummer's troop is now begging for funds donations to "Save the Middle Class!" They are even touring the University Campus telling students if they don't get re-elected the student assistance programs will disappear. Fear mongering worked in the 1930's central Europe. Hopefully not here.

Fear mongering worked in the last few elections, if you ask me..

G.W. Bush used terrorism as fear, don't elect the other guy, he is weak on terrorism. Economy, Terrorism, War, Immigration, Race and Religion, it's all been used in the past...

Read some history on elections in the 1950 to 1965.. geez

Hysteria-peddling politicians fear-mongering always remains the best tool to exploit the fear among masses fomented by the anti-Islam and anti-Mexican & anti-Immigration, bad economy and taxes, Terrorism and potential War..

Just look at the Arizona Politicians, Brewer-Pearce-Arpaio-Babeu fear-mongering, anti-Mexican scapegoating nonsense..

 

[Liberalman]

If I were an American I'd be pissed off at this. If it happened here I'd be pissed. Foreign money should not be allowed to interfere in any election.

It happens all the time. Large brown envelopes of money coming from the same person called Anonymous