Go get ‘em Maggie!

This whole thing makes no sense to me, whatsoever. Those who accepted contributions prior to the court’s reversal of the entire law shouldn’t have had to refund them. They were following the law when they received the contributions.

What is that old term, ex-post facto?

Jim (R),

they may not need to refund the money, but they shouldnt be making those arguments in private.

I’ll agree with that, but I think the commission screwed up big time in their ruling.

That being the case, this should be a moot point.

I lay the blame at the feet of the Missouri Supreme Court and their wishy-washy decision. It gave very little guidance to the commission.

Again, like I’ve said before, does this affect anyone in an upcoming election? It’s my understanding that the only people asking for a hardship are those people who ran in municipal elections last August that already spent any over-the-limit contributions they received between Jan 1 - Jul 27. But in terms of any candidates currently running for office, this is a moot issue. This seems like it’s more a publicity stunt than anything else.