More than $11 million in McCutcheon Money has already flowed into this year's mid-term congressional elections.

When you find a leak, do you jump up and point at it? Yell about it? What if the leak is part of a massive flood? Do you call up your friends and make plans to build a dam? What if the leak comes at you when you’ve been trapped in a basement with floodwater rising up to your neck? Early Wednesday

Reformers in Washington are looking for a few good scandals. Watergate led to the biggest overhaul of campaign finance law in the past century. Outrage over donors sleeping in the Lincoln Bedroom and Enron influence peddling helped spur the 2002 McCain-Feingold overhaul. And the Jack Abramoff affair

Nate Silver has already dubbed the 2014 election as " the least important in years." But this year's midterms are still breaking records for at least one thing: Secret political spending.

In the wake of the Supreme Court's recent decisions in Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC, this amendment is a necessary counterbalance to the deluge of money that wealthy individuals, corporations and special interests have flooded into our elections.

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor lost big yesterday to Tea Party candidate Dave Brat in his Virginia Republican primary.

In a recent op-ed at Forbes, Luke Wachob touts the decision in McCutcheon v. FEC as a victory for free speech.

The Supreme Court just decided an incredibly important case called McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission (FEC). The Court's ruling will allow unprecedented amounts of money to flow directly into our political system. [...]

When the McCutcheon ruling came down I was sitting in a room with several young African American men and women East Harlem talking about their struggles with employment in a world they said was stacked against them. They constantly talked about race, class, and power—but ultimately believed they

The Supreme Court on Wednesday continued its crusade to knock down all barriers to the distorting power of money on American elections. In the court’s most significant campaign-finance ruling since Citizens United in 2010, five justices voted to eliminate sensible and long-established contribution