A new Ipsos survey shows Americans overwhelmingly reject the idea that unlimited political spending should be treated as free speech protected by the First Amendment.

Key takeaways: 81% of Americans are concerned about the influence of money in politics, including 78% of Republicans, 90% of Democrats, and 82% of Independents. And 77% say it poses a threat to elections.

Also important: 72% agree Congress and the states should be able to reasonably regulate and limit money in campaigns and elections, including super-majorities of Republicans (69%), Democrats (83%), and Independents (78%).

“It’s the biggest mystery in Georgia politics right now: Who’s paying for the attacks on Republican Lt. Gov. Burt Jones?,” the AP reports.

“Someone operating under the name ‘Georgians for Integrity’ has dumped around $5 million into television ads, mailers and texts. The attacks claim Jones, who already has… Trump’s endorsement in his run for governor next year, has been using his office to enrich himself. For any Georgian settling down to watch a football game, the ads have been nearly inescapable.”

“The Jones campaign is hopping mad, threatening legal action against television stations.”

The Washington Post ranks the billionaire political donors.

“The 20 most prolific donors on the Forbes billionaires list have collectively given nearly $5 billion between 2015 and 2024, spending on everything from state ballot measures to congressional elections and presidential races.”

Washington Post: “In an era defined by major political divisions and massive wealth accumulation for the richest Americans, billionaires are spending unprecedented amounts on U.S. politics.”

“Dozens have stepped up their political giving in recent years, leading to a record-breaking surge of donations by the ultrarich in 2024. Since 2000, political giving by the wealthiest 100 Americans to federal elections has gone up almost 140 times, well outpacing the growing costs of campaigns.”

“When presidential contenders or congressional hopefuls flame out and abandon their campaigns, they often prepare to fight another day or simply fade away,” NOTUS reports.

“But a few of these old campaigns experience a different fate, morphing into deadbeat zombie operations — technically still alive and functioning, but unable to pay their numerous bills to various creditors.”

“New filings with the Federal Election Commission show just how much some politicos owe for old campaigns, including those of a current Trump administration official and an an MSNBC television host.”

“Two Republican super PACs paid nearly $1 million this month to quietly settle an inquiry into whether they illicitly coordinated with the campaign of Lee Zeldin, a member of President Trump’s cabinet, during his 2022 run for governor of New York,” the New York Times reports.

“Texas Democrat James Talarico has built a national profile railing against GOP billionaires in politics — but has quietly accepted funds from a PAC backed by one of the wealthiest donors in the Republican Party,” Politico reports.

“The single biggest donor to Talarico’s state House reelection bid last year was a group funded by casino mogul Miriam Adelson, according to state campaign finance data.”

Adam Bonica: “The digital deluge is a familiar annoyance for anyone on a Democratic fundraising list. It’s a relentless cacophony of bizarre texts and emails, each one more urgent than the last, promising that your immediate $15 donation is the only thing standing between democracy and the abyss.”

“The main rationale offered for this fundraising frenzy is that it’s a necessary evil—that the tactics, while unpleasant, are brutally effective at raising the money needed to win. But an analysis of the official FEC filings tells a very different story. The fundraising model is not a brutally effective tool for the party; it is a financial vortex that consumes the vast majority of every dollar it raises.”

Key takeaway: “A single consulting firm extracted $282 million from a network of spam PACs while delivering just $11 million to actual campaigns.”

“The crypto industry has donated more than $26 million to President Trump this year,” Axios reports.

“The massive infusion underscores how Trump and the crypto industry have been cozying up to one another.”

“In late April, the campaign committee of former Sen. Kyrsten Sinema made an odd expenditure, even by contemporary political standards: It dropped $352 at a self-described ‘naturally based wellness provider’ that provides chiropractic, massage and ‘shockwave therapy’ services from a shopping center in Cave Creek, Arizona,” NOTUS reports.

ProPublica: “In 2023, while Kristi Noem was governor of South Dakota, she supplemented her income by secretly accepting a cut of the money she raised for a nonprofit that promotes her political career, tax records show.”

“In what experts described as a highly unusual arrangement, the nonprofit routed funds to a personal company of Noem’s that had recently been established in Delaware. The payment totaled $80,000 that year, a significant boost to her roughly $130,000 government salary. Since the nonprofit is a so-called dark money group — one that’s not required to disclose the names of its donors — the original source of the money remains unknown.”

“Noem then failed to disclose the $80,000 payment to the public.”

“In a shot at ActBlue, the left’s major online donation platform, President Donald Trump plans to sign a presidential memorandum on Thursday cracking down on foreign contributions in American elections,” Politico reports.

“Attorney General Pam Bondi’s office is expected to be involved in the crackdown, the person said, though further details about the mechanism she will use were not immediately available. The order is expected to specifically target ActBlue, which Republicans have long claimed could be exploited by foreign actors.”