Attack advertising paid for by secret donations to opaque political groups is having a dramatic impact on the Republican presidential nomination race.
The Iowa campaign of Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, was severely damaged by an aggressive campaign from a group backing Mitt Romney.
As a large political action committee, known as a “Super PAC”, the group is not affiliated to an official campaign, but can accept unlimited funds from unidentified corporations or people to pay for radio or television clips. The practice was made legal by the Supreme Court in 2010.
Mr Gingrich accused Mr Romney of trying to buy the election through the estimated $3.5 million (£2.25?million) campaign about his record by the Restore Our Future PAC. He said: “It’s very hard to run $3.5 million of negative ads and pretend it’s not yours and not have people think you’re being dishonest.”
Linda Laingrock, a former Gingrich supporter from Davenport, said she deserted him after watching the adverts that claimed he had said slanderous things on issues such as global warming. “I’m not sure if they are true," Mrs Laingrock, 64, said, “But they certainly swayed me towards Governor Romney.
Super PACs were made possible by a landmark Supreme Court case between a Right-wing pressure group and the US election watchdog. The court ruled that firms must be allowed to spend funds on “electioneering communication” under the first amendment of the constitution, which guarantees freedom of expression.
Funding reform activists are campaigning for the decision to be overturned, under the slogan corporations are not people and money is not speech.
Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard law professor, described the set-up as a corruption of the system. “We have got to have a conversation… about public funding in our election system,” he said.
