Well, there is still nearly two years to go before americans cast their ballots but already big money donors are prepared to blow billions of dollars on Political Campaigns and tv ads aimed at influencing who and what americans vote for in late 2016. If you need more proof that america democracy is up for sale then you only need to look at reports where Koch Brothers are ready for a 1 billion war chest to spend in the next election cycle. That will go to promote conservative causes and candidates including the person that the g. O. P. Nominates to replace obama in the white house. This 889 million amount is the leaked figure from a session this week at the Koch Networks annual winter donor gathering, a sort of billionaire caucus, staggering to some by any measure, and the money that the Koch Brothers raced for the 2012 campaign. Its also about as much as what the entire Republican National committee spent during the last president ial cycle. I will remind you that all that money did not help mitt romney win the election in 2012. Maybe spending twice as much will do the trick in 2016, but the dollar amounts are only part of the story. News of the Koch Brothers comes in the fifth anniversary of citizens unite thats the Supreme Court decision that opened the floodgates for corporate donors and outside special Interest Groups to spend on campaigns. Of the naysayers say that Citizens United encourages the rise of socalled dark money during elections. Dark money is money that the rich and powerful often give to political nonprofits that are under no obligation to report where they got their money. Since those deeppocketed donors can keep their funding a secret, detractors say that donors like the Koch Brothers, have an influence on outside elections. That only compromises democracy. The Koch Brothers are shahing shower showering donation. The charles and david are the nightmare that democrats wish they could wake up from. Last years midterm elections proved a point. In Key Senate Races like North Carolina they bought over 9,000 tv ads hammering the opponent of tom ti llis, the republican candidate who shares their free market political wish list. Cuts in political spending, cuts in taxes and full repeal of obamacare. In tilliss narrow victory, it was money well spent. Im the next United States senator. [ cheering ] the billionaire brothers spent roughly 290 million in the 2014 mid terms mostly through their complicated web of dark money organizations. Thats Campaign Spending largely by nonprofits that cant easily be tracked or sourced. There are plenty of other organizations that are also nonprofit, 501 c 4 social welfare groups that are linked in some ways, in some form and fashion to the Koch Brothers either quite directly or more indirectly. The Koch Brothers have pioneered the use of billionaire caucuses closed door seminars to raise cash from fellow wealthy donors including Sheldon Adelson who support proisrael causes. He spent 100 million in the the 2012 president ial election with these meetings known to raise as much as 50 million a pop. But the democrats have taken on their own hushhush affairs to rake in money from bigtime donors. Launched in 20152005, the no, sir alliance aims to, quote build prerogative infrastructure that could help counter the wellfunded and sophisticateed conservative apparatus helping to steer 500 million to liberal groups. Attendees including george soros and San Francisco hedge funder tom story, who donated 73 million in the 2013 mid terms. And while the koch brother spending helped republicans take control of congress this year, there are some who worry that dark money will always allow the very rich republican or otherwise, to advance their interests above all others. Its important to note that what the kochs and others who trade in dark political money are doing is on its face perfectly legal. There are plenty of folks who think the law should thank, and something as public as a Political Campaign should not be fueled with secret crash according to david leventhal. Dave leads the Team Investigating the influence of money in politics, and he joins me from washington. David, it does seem when we do stories like this, it seems quite focused on republicans and conservatives doing this, theyre way ahead of the democrats. But on one side the democrats are criticizing them for it, and on the other side, the democrats are catching up and would like to be as effective at this as the conservatives. Without question. There are groups who have been animated by democrats animateed by liberals, who are giving dark money. I have three emails from democratic groups talking about the Koch Brothers. Yes, sure, theyre going to be raising an incredible amount of money. Their network is going to be more active than they ever have been before. But the democrats are going to have an answer. The answer at least in part is going to be dark money in 2016 even though the same mouth on the other side theyre talking about Citizens United being an evil for politics, talking about dark money being an awful thing for american political discourse. All that being said theyre still going to do it. Let me ask you this, in the end there are candidates who run. One will win and voters vote. Somebodys dollar still does not have more power than my vote bus, and nobody is putting a gun to my head and taking me to the ballot box and asking me to do it. Since the responsibility on us as voters is to be better informed and not fall victim to endless advertising, which is what this comes down to. In spirit the Supreme Court agreed with that point. Many conservatives agree with that point saying market politics is a marketplace of ideas. If youre a rich guy and you want to use your money to fuel political messages, good on you. Ultimately its going to all cam out in the wash, and voters will have information and act on that information. It doesnt really matter if its a known donor or not a known donor who is fueling the message. The message is still out there and voters will have an opportunity to weigh it. On the other side many liberals especially will say look, in the most public of important arenas, which is elections and campaigns in this country you should know who is behind a message. You should know the friends of the candidate who is running. The friend happens to be a wealthy cooperation or a shady union or somebody who has a very very special interest. Im sympathetic to the view, but tell me why it matters. If we find out that the idea is put forward by adelson because its a proisrael idea, or the Koch Brothers because its Pro Industries that were involved in. Whatever the case is. Why does it matter who is behind the idea . Why is the idea not judged on its own merit . Because many times the people at least the argument is that many times the people or the entities that are putting forth that picker message have a very very narrow special interest that would not necessarily represent a constituency that is going to vote for a house kind or a Senate Candidate or president ial candidate. As a result that person is able to pump in an incredible amount of money into this system, have an incredible amount of influence in this particular election and the public never knows who that person is. Just know that the person is funneling a whole lot of money into an organization that doesnt have to disclose its donors publicly when it buys up the airwaves and has the message that is going to support the democrat or support a republican or very often alley will attack a republican or attack a democrat. What is thewhat is the range of solutions for this from the most likely to the least likely . One of the most likely at least in terms of a governmental entity addressing this is going to be what the irs does. The irs does have the ability weve reported this a whole lot at the center of the republican integrity to go ahead and change the rules for what a politically active nonprofit can do. The head of the irs has told us that 2015 will be a year where they strongly look at the rules that governor these types of nonprofit groups, and one possibility is that ultimately they decide that there is going to be a lower threshold for the type of activity that particular nonprofit is going to have to even qualify for having political activity in the first place. Or cap the amount of political activity that they can have. Isnt the irs a little bit defanged on this one give the controversy around the irs politically targeting conservative groups . Thats actually right. Number one theyre defanged because of that, and number two the problems theyre having with just having enough Staff Members to review nonprofit organizations and poe his and do the Due Diligence theyre supposed to do and make sure that nonprofits are operating in legal fashion. Above and beyond that is a tall task. Two things are very unlikely, Congress Passing any law that will reel back the influence of nonprofit organizations or in general. Big money in politics, and the most unlikely thing of all is an institutional amendment overturned Citizens United. Many have been pushing for this. Snowballs chance in haiti is probably an apt description of that going forward. David leventhal at the senior of political integrity. Coming up, well look at business deals that might remind you of the last learn republican to run for president. Were moving this show to primetime. Catch me at 10 30 eastern and 7 30 pacific starting money. Well be back in two minutes. Real reporting that brings you the world. This is a pretty dangerous trip. Security in beirut is tight. More reporters. They dont have the resources to take the fight to al shabaab. More bureaus, more stories. This is where the typhoon came ashore. Giving you a real global perspective like no other can. Al jazeera, nairobi. On the turkeysyria border. Venezuela. Beijing. Kabul. Hong kong. Ukraine. The artic. Real reporting from around the world. This is what we do. Al jazeera america. The front runner for the 2016 president ial Campaign Jeb Bush and mitt romney are already on the fundraising hunt to secure commitment from deeppocketed donors like the Koch Brothers. There are plenty of similarities between the two candidates. Theyre both former goshes and hail from political families. Jeb bush has moved into moves that while all perfectly legal may cast a shadow on his potential candidacy. David shuster has more. Mitt romney became ceo of bain capital the day the company was formed. His mission to wreak massive rewards for himself and his investors. It was a damning image in the the 2012 president ial campaign. He made 21 million but yet paid a lower tax rate than many middle class families. If he wins, we lose. I have just called president obama to congratulate him on his victory. Some analysts chalked up mitt romneys eventually loss private private. Anything that is right for Opposition Research is fair game and potentially some of jeb bushs financial dealings may be a part that have. According to regulatory filings, bush launched in may of of 2013 a private equity firm, and through that company established three funds. Worth 40 million, 51 million and 22 million respectively. The largest and most recent fund is set up to take foreign money from foreign investors. 98 of its funding. Established overseas in the United Kingdom the fund takes advantage of generous tax benefits that keep profits safe from the irs, a major issue for voters according to taxpayer advocates. As Companies Move offshore and take jobs offshore per divesting where they would pay from america where they would pay their fair share of taxes. Investor money from, hl logistics bought 1. 4 million shares of dorian an u. S. Company that ships oil and natural gas exports overseas. And Companies Like dorian can capitalize on another influence a string of former george w. Bush officials have become powerful lobbyists for the Energy Industry and expedite the exporting of natural gas products to asia. But all of these high level connections dont come without a price in public perception. Jeb bush has had a Playing Field like very few americans have had. He has a father who was president. A brother who was president dealings in internationally his name opens more doors than anybody you could possibly know. Hes certainly capitalized on that with partners and businesses that have latched on to jeb bush have been able to make money off of that. Jeb bush declined an interview, but in an interview interview, he defended his work. Were creating jobs, expanding business, im not ashamed of that at all. That might be useful in washington, d. C. In. Analysts asay opposed to romney, bushs lack of reputation as a financial titan could help him in the end. Yellow bush is not going to be running as president as a professional businessman as mitt romney did. Jeb bush will be running as a conservative reformer as someone who has a governing record. Bushs background may not be a big pitch as to why he should be president. David shuster joins me now. He reported the peace. The value of jeb bushs funds are not a lot. When i saw that. 98million here. These private equity funds that we talk about and americans love to hate is much bigger. Its weird that people cant keep their hands out of it, the idea of private equity, foreign money coming in, tax shelters. I dont know how this sits with american voters. It doesnt sit when it seems like the politician is essentially trading pieces of paper or making money by making risky investments and you take the risk and the government, you know shoulders whatever if you dont fail to materialize on that risk. Thats where jeb bush may have a problem. Youre right, its not to the scale of mitt romney, but its not like ross perot who back in 1992 could point to an Electronics Company that created a lot of jobs and products that people can identify. Its difficult for average voters to identify, well, okay, hes raising funds. Hes doing it with chinese help and plowing it back into this fund. It seems like hes just trading with pieces of paper. If you go back to the last election and once it fades from memory the concept of the 47 the mitt romney recording the idea that we were bifurcated by class and income in many cases in voting, this is becoming a bigger deal. Its becoming a bigger deal, and the emphasis will be when the First Quarter report comes down, about where did he get all his money. And hes on pace to raise 100 million in the First Quarter. The stories will shift from these strange connections in terms of private equity to, well, who are all these people who are funding his campaign, and you will see that it is again people who are in the private equity world or energy world or the world of wall street. That is another issue for americans. What sort of influence do they have over him that i cant have . Is there an opening or an advantage to someone running against jeb bush to play along these lines . To a certain extent. They can make the same argument that jeb bush represents what mitt romney represented in 2012 and perhaps hes out of touch. But jeb bush right now all hes trying to show mitt romney is that you should not be the establishment figure in this campaign. I can raise more money and build a better Political Organization. Thats what hes doing. His goal is to chase romney out of the race. He can then deal with the republican establishment uniting them, and fending off a challenge from rand paul or someone from the more conservative libertarian party. I can see all those republican candidates ganging up on both of these guys saying theyre kind of the same. They are and that could condition conceive conceivably happen but money takes you far and he has the best Political Organization except for rand paul and the tea party, and that will take him far in terms of with standing these attacks he could conceivably get from these other republicans running against him. Thank you for joining us. David shuster. The Defense Department has been fighting budget cuts imposed on it by law for the last future four years. They were called the sequester. A stupid name for a stupid thing. It was intended to bring down the national debt. Next week president obama is expected to propose a 534 billion defense budget. 34billion higher than the proposed cap but that did not stop republicans and military leaders from criticizing it. Here we go again. If we in congress dont act see sequestration will return in full in 2016 setting our military on a far more dangerous course. The nations top generals and admiral in a new champion in the person of the republican chairman of the Senate Armed Senate Committee jan mccain calling the budget cuts senseless in the face of russia alqaeda and north korea. Its purely the Collateral Damage of political gridlock. One by one they decried the dangerous impact of the spending restrictions. I believe this is the most uncertain ive seen the National Security environment in my nearly 40 years of service. We would further delay capabilitie