The Center for Public Integrity

Last summer, hedge fund pioneer Julian Robertson made the maximum $2,500 contribution to Mitt Romney’s campaign for the Republican presidential nomination. With a net worth somewhere north of $2 billion, it seemed as though he could do a lot more.

Thanks to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision, he did.

Robertson gave $1.25 million to Restore Our Future, a super PAC that has underwritten a relentless advertising campaign ripping Romney’s opponents. That’s 500 times the contribution he made in June.

Robertson is not alone. Of the $43.2 million raised by the attack PAC, $20.5 million, or 48 percent, came from finance industry donors, according to an analysis of Federal Election Commission data by the Center for Public Integrity.

At least $13.5 million came from private equity firms ($7 million) and hedge funds ($6.5 million) while most of the rest came from investment banks and other asset managers. So-called “non-bank lenders” that run storefront cash-for-title and payday lending operations gave the super PAC $437,500, according to the analysis.

Restore Our Future is by far the best-funded of the super PACs backing presidential candidates in the 2012 election. The super PAC closed out the month of February with $10.5 million cash on hand, more than Romney’s campaign, according to FEC records.

Romney, a former private equity executive, wants to repeal the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act and has said he is opposed to doing away with a tax loophole that has helped make private equity and hedge fund managers enormously wealthy over the years.

The finance industry’s total percentage of contributions would be greater were it not for homebuilder and long-time Republican donor Bob Perry, who gave $3 million to the super PAC in February, bringing his total contributions to $4 million.

Ahead of Tuesday’s GOP presidential primary in Wisconsin, wealthy investor Foster Friess is giving his preferred candidate, Rick Santorum, a boost. This time though, rather than contributing to a pro-Santorum super PAC, he’s taking matters into his own hands.

Friess has personally spent $8,675 to help his friend win, including roughly $1,000 each for a radio ad touting the former Pennsylvania senator and a newspaper ad, both in Friess’s hometown of Rice Lake, Wis.

Citizens have long been free to spend their personal funds directly on independent expenditures, which cannot be coordinated with candidates’ campaigns, but such spending is exceedingly rare. In fact, Friess is just the third individual to make personal independent expenditures this election cycle, according to an iWatch News analysis of filings with the Federal Election Commission.

Typically, people tend to give money to existing organizations like super PACs, which can pool resources, produce more efficient ad buys and “capitalize on the expertise” of the people running the group, said attorney Paul Ryan, of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center.

Ryan commended Friess for being willing to attach his name to these advertisements.

If you are willing to spend money on a political advertisement, Ryan said, “you should stand by its content.”

FEC records indicate that Friess, who now resides in Wyoming, spent more than $4,000 at The Floridian Gardens, which bills itself as Eau Claire's “premiere reception hall,” on a luncheon where he said that Santorum is “the authentic leader America needs,” according to a tweet he posted about the event.

At first glance, Rick Santorum’s decision to give a speech at the Jelly Belly Company's factory in Fairfield, Calif., seems a little odd.

But Jelly Belly isn’t just any candy maker. The company — best known for making jelly beans that taste like buttered popcorn and other interesting flavors — is a major supporter of conservative causes and one of the few corporations to make direct contributions to a super PAC.

And this isn’t just a speech — the former Republican senator from Pennsylvania and GOP presidential contender is hosting a $1,000-a-head fundraiser to help his cash-strapped campaign, inside the factory, at the conclusion of the speech.

"Jelly Belly Candy Company looks forward to discussing sugar reform with presidential candidate Rick Santorum when he visits our Fairfield factory on Thursday, March 29," reads a company statement.

Jelly Belly has long been tied to Republicans, with President Ronald Reagan ranking as its most famous fan. (A portrait of the Gipper, who served the brand at his inauguration and in the Oval Office, made from 10,000 of the company’s candies hangs in his presidential library.)

In September 2010, Jelly Belly became one of the few companies to take advantage of the post-Citizens United campaign finance laws, making a $10,000 corporate donation to Citizens for Economic & National Security, which was created to support California Republicans.

That amount made up nearly 20 percent of the super PAC’s receipts.

Multibillionaire Sheldon Adelson and his family, who have kept the flagging presidential candidacy of Newt Gingrich alive, seem poised to send millions to Republican-allied groups and possibly a super PAC backing frontrunner Mitt Romney, according to fundraisers with ties to the casino owner.

Adelson along with wife Miriam and other family members has garnered notice by donating a whopping $16.5 million to a super PAC backing Gingrich for president.

A private dinner Adelson hosted on March 22 at his home in Las Vegas drew Republican bigwigs from Washington, D.C., plus some of the GOP’s best-known fundraisers and donors. The diners were in Las Vegas early for a weekend summit of the Republican Jewish Coalition (RJC), a nonprofit advocacy group that Adelson has backed heavily.

At the dinner, the Adelson family privately sent strong signals to some Romney allies that millions would flow from them to a super PAC backing the former Massachusetts governor — perhaps on a par with what they’ve given to Gingrich, assuming the ex-House Speaker, who is trailing badly, eventually drops out of the race.

Adelson, whose fortune is pegged at almost $25 billion by Forbes, is a prime example of the new breed of super donor who in the wake of court rulings in early 2010, can give unlimited amounts to outside spending groups supporting a candidate.

The big name attendees at Adelson’s private soiree last Thursday included Reince Priebus, the chairman of the Republican National Committee and ex-Minnesota Sen. Norm Coleman, who now chairs a super PAC and a nonprofit group raising millions to help House Republicans and is also an RJC board member.

Both men spoke at the dinner, thanking Adelson for his support for GOP causes in recent years.

Sen. John McCain slammed the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United decision as “incredibly naïve” on Tuesday, and predicted there would be “huge scandals” in its wake.

The Arizona Republican was co-author with then-colleague Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., of the last major attempt by government to reform campaign finance laws in 2002. He was participating in a panel discussion on the decision at the Newseum in Washington, D.C.

The law prohibited corporations and unions from bankrolling issue ads that mention a candidate within the final weeks before an election.

But under the contentious Citizens United ruling, corporations and unions were freed not only to fund issue ads that mention a candidate but to also make so-called “independent expenditures” that urge people to vote for or vote against candidates.

Many worry this change will increase the potential for corruption and unseemly alliances between lawmakers and special interests.

The ruling has given rise to independent expenditure groups called "super PACs," which can accept unlimited contributions from individuals, corporations, unions and trade groups. They may not donate money to candidates’ campaigns nor coordinate with candidates about their expenditures.

Super PACs have collectively raised more than $230 million since their creation in 2010, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics.

In the 2012 GOP presidential race, each candidate has benefited from super PACs — particularly former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney — which have frequently been run by their former top aides and funded by an elite network of donors.

At the Thomson Reuters-sponsored event, McCain called this overlap between campaigns and super PACs “outrageous” and said the independence of super PACs is “the worst joke in Washington.”

Where would candidates be in the presidential race without their super PAC allies? The nascent groups, created in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling,  have been a dominant force in the GOP primary, and they have helped extend a nomination contest that many expected to be wrapped up long ago.

All candidates have benefited from super PACs, but no group has collected more money than the pro-Mitt Romney “Restore Our Future” super PAC, which raised more than $43 million through February. That’s nearly 60 percent of the sum that the Romney campaign itself has raised.

The money in both accounts — the super PAC and the campaign — has allowed Romney’s messages to dominate the GOP race, even if his campaign is legally prohibited from coordinating on expenditures with Restore Our Future.

Newt Gingrich, meanwhile, has been aided by a super PAC called “Winning Our Future,” which has raised nearly $19 million. And the “Red, White & Blue Fund,” which supports Rick Santorum, has raised nearly $5.8 million. In fact, Winning Our Future has nearly matched the Gingrich campaign dollar for dollar: For every $1 the Gingrich campaign raised through February, the super PAC raised 91 cents.

Looming large on the horizon, however, is President Barack Obama, who has amassed more than $158 million for his re-election campaign, and, thanks to no serious primary opposition, still counts nearly $85 million in the bank. Furthermore, last month, Obama gave his blessing to a super PAC called "Priorities USA Action," which has already aired ads attacking Romney.

A February increase in financial support for underdog Rick Santorum was too little and too late to slow the far-better financed Mitt Romney, who coasted to an easy victory in the Illinois Republican presidential primary Tuesday.

Santorum’s campaign raised $9 million in February compared with $4.5 million in January. The “Red, White and Blue Fund,” a super PAC supporting former Pennsylvania Sen. Santorum, raised $3 million, 41 percent more than what it raised in January.

Romney’s campaign, meanwhile, raised $12 million in February, nearly doubling its January total, while the super PAC supporting the ex-Massachusetts Gov., “Restore Our Future,” brought in $6.4 million, $3 million of which came from Texas homebuilder and Republican super donor Bob Perry of Texas.

Romney drew 47 percent of the vote in Illinois, former Pennsylvania senator Santorum garnered 35 percent, and Texas congressman Ron Paul of Texas drew 9.3 percent while Gingrich lagged in fourth at 8 percent.

Santorum’s recent financial surge has been aided by Wyoming businessman Foster Friess, who donated $600,000 to the pro-Santorum Red, White and Blue Fund in February, and retired Louisiana energy executive William Dore, who gave the group $500,000 last month.

The pro-Santorum PAC also received a $1 million contribution last month from Annette Simmons, wife of GOP mega-donor Harold Simmons, a billionaire investor who hails from Texas.

All told, the Simmons family donated to each of the top three GOP presidential candidates’ super PACs in February, with Harold giving $100,000 to Restore Our Future and another $100,000 to “Winning Our Future,” a super PAC supportive of Gingrich.

In his quest to remake the Senate Republican caucus in his own image, Tea Party kingmaker Sen. Jim DeMint (R-S.C.) has thrown some serious cash at a conservative super PAC that has attacked a Republican House member and other GOP candidates for office.

The Citizens United case opened up a whole new way of giving for nonprofit corporations, but there are still some lines that can’t be crossed.

Last July, the pro-Mitt Romney super PAC “Restore Our Future” accepted a check for $100,000 from the Rod and Leslie Aycox Foundation, a nonprofit with the same tax status as a charity or hospital. That’s a no-no according to the Internal Revenue Service.

The 501(c)(3) corporation was clearly in violation of tax law, according to the IRS, which states these organizations are “absolutely prohibited from directly or indirectly participating in, or intervening in, any political campaign.”

So the foundation faced the wrath of the IRS, but the super PAC?

“The liability is all on the donor side … but there is no legal exposure for the recipient,” said campaign lawyer Kenneth Gross.

In February, the foundation, based in Alpharetta, Ga., remedied the situation.

In the newest filing to the Federal Election Commission, Restore Our Future refunded the full $100,000 to the foundation.

“The foundation requested a contribution refund, and when they did so, we promptly complied with their request,” said Charlie Spies, the treasurer of Restore Our Future.

The $100,000 contribution was returned to the foundation in February. That same month, Rod Aycox personally made a contribution to the pro-Romney super PAC of $100,000.

While the Aycox Foundation was liable for the contribution, Restore Our Future was never at risk, said Paul Ryan at the Campaign Legal Center.