标题：埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）可能刚刚找到了一种购买我们选举的方法

第一位埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）抓住了联邦官僚机构的控制权，并将其弄坏了。然后，他指挥了威斯康星州保守派最高法院候选人布拉德·席梅尔（Brad Schimel）的竞选活动。

Elon Musk's extraordinary intervention in the Trump administration, unveiled in a recent New York Times article, has sparked discussion about the role of big donors in politics.

埃隆·马斯克（Elon Musk）在最近的《纽约时报》（New York Times）的一篇文章中揭示了特朗普政府的非凡干预，引发了人们对大捐助者在政治中的作用的讨论。

As the article highlights, Musk's vast wealth and willingness to spend heavily on political causes are undeniable. However, the article also notes that, despite contributing nearly $1 million to a joint fund-raising committee for Trump's re-election and over $250 million in super PAC spending, Musk prefers not to donate directly to candidates. Instead, he focuses on funding organizations that support candidates indirectly.

正如文章所强调的那样，马斯克的巨大财富和大量花在政治事业上的意愿是不可否认的。但是，文章还指出，尽管为特朗普连任的联合筹款委员会捐款了近100万美元，超过2.5亿美元的超级PAC支出捐款，但马斯克不愿直接向候选人捐款。相反，他专注于间接支持候选人的资助组织。

This strategy allows Musk to exert influence over a broad range of political activity without tying himself to specific candidates. While super PACs cannot coordinate directly with candidates, they can spend independently to support or oppose them. In essence, super PACs act as intermediaries, amplifying the voice of big donors.

这种策略使马斯克在不绑定特定候选人的情况下对广泛的政治活动产生影响。尽管超级PAC不能直接与候选人协调，但他们可以独立支出以支持或反对他们。从本质上讲，超级PAC作为中介机构，扩大了大捐助者的声音。

The article further mentions that Musk's contributions to joint fund-raising committees were made with the understanding that they would be used to support Trump's candidacy. Joint fund-raising committees are formed by candidates, political parties, and political action committees to pool contributions and support common political goals.

文章进一步提到，马斯克对联合筹款委员会的贡献是为了了解它们将被用来支持特朗普的候选人资格。联合筹款委员会由候选人，政党和政治行动委员会组成，以汇总捐款并支持共同的政治目标。

However, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) failed to enforce a 1971 law that prohibits joint fund-raising committees from coordinating on how contributions are spent. This omission, in effect, permits the mega-rich to directly command candidates' campaigns and advise on how campaign funds are utilized.

但是，联邦选举委员会（FEC）未能执行1971年的法律，该法律禁止联合筹款委员会协调如何花费。实际上，这种遗漏使大型富裕人士可以直接指挥候选人的竞选活动，并就如何利用竞选资金进行建议。

This non-ruling, which slipped past most news outlets and came too late in the race to influence the outcome, could drastically transform the 2026 midterms.

这个不统治的人滑过了大多数新闻媒体，在竞赛中为时已晚，无法影响结果，这可能会巨大的改变2026年中期。

Joint fund-raising committees are meant to allow candidates, parties, and PACs to jointly fund-raise but not jointly spend. Yet, in 2024, Republican candidates began running ads backed by joint fund-raising committee money, claiming that such ads were just fund-raising appeals.

联合筹款委员会旨在允许候选人，当事方和PAC共同筹款，但不能共同支出。然而，在2024年，共和党候选人开始在联合筹款委员会资金的支持下投放广告，声称这些广告只是筹款的上诉。

Democrats asked the FEC to intervene, but the commissioners, evenly split between Republicans and Democrats, deadlocked. As it stands, nothing is preventing major donors from using joint fund-raising committees to closely cooperate with candidates.

民主党人要求FEC进行干预，但专员在共和党人和民主党人之间均匀分配了僵局。就目前而言，没有什么可以阻止主要捐助者使用联合筹款委员会与候选人密切合作。

This represents a significant shift in campaign finance. Back in 2010, when the Supreme Court ruled that PACs that do not donate to candidates but spend independently to support them can collect unlimited sums, many viewed it as a threat to American democracy.

这代表了竞选财务的重大转变。早在2010年，当最高法院裁定不向候选人捐款而是独立支出以支持他们的PAC可以收取无限的款项，许多人认为这是对美国民主的威胁。

But those fears were largely exaggerated. For instance, despite rumors of super PACs bankrupting candidates, it's noteworthy that in the 2024 campaign, all three candidates who withdrew—Larry Hogan, Vivek Ramaswamy, and Tim Scott—were financially strong and had formidable super PAC support.

但是这些恐惧在很大程度上被夸大了。例如，尽管有谣言说超级PACS破产了候选人，但值得注意的是，在2024年的竞选活动中，所有三名候选人撤回了Larry Hogan，Vivek Ramaswamy和Tim Scott，这在财务上很强大，并获得了强大的超级PAC支持。

Moreover, because of a provision in a 1971 campaign finance law, super PACs must pay higher rates for TV ads than candidates' campaigns do in swing states. This factor, along with the ease of small-dollar online giving to candidates, meant that super PACs never had as much impact as they were expected to.

此外，由于1971年竞选法律法律的规定，超级PAC必须为电视广告支付比候选人在摇摆州的竞选活动的费用更高。这一因素，以及对候选人的小额美元在线捐赠的便利，这意味着超级PAC从未像他们预期的那样产生那么多的影响。

Small donors also played a major role in the 2024 campaign. According to FEC data, in each of the past three presidential elections with Trump as the Republican nominee, the Democratic candidate has received far more money from contributions of $200 or less than Trump: 2.5 times more in 2016, 1.4 times more in 2020, and 3.3 times more in 2024.

小型捐助者在2024年的竞选活动中也发挥了重要作用。根据FEC的数据，在过去的三个总统选举中，特朗普是共和党提名人，民主党候选人从200美元或低于特朗普的捐款中获得了更多的钱：2016年的2.5倍，2020年的1.4倍，而2024年的3.3倍。

With Democrats benefiting from small-donor contributions and super PACs facing disadvantages in ad rates, Republicans saw an opportunity in bending the rules of joint fund-raising committees.

随着民主党人受益于小型捐款和超级PAC面临劣势的AD率，共和党人看到了一个机会，这是有机会的，这弯曲了联合筹款委员会的规则。

Jon Berkon of the Elias Law Group, which often represents the Democratic Party in litigation, explained that joint fund-raising committees get the lowest unit rate for ads, the same as candidates, which is a huge advantage. Super PACs have to pay the regular rate, which can be three to five times higher in swing states during high-volume ad periods.

Elias Law Group的Jon Berkon通常代表民主党在诉讼中，他解释说，联合筹款委员会获得了广告的最低单位率，与候选人相同，这是一个巨大的优势。超级PAC必须支付常规费用，在大批量广告期间，秋千州的三到五倍。

Berkon argued that broadening the power of joint fund-raising committees will fundamentally change the orientation of candidates, placing even greater emphasis on the need to raise funds from larger sources.

伯肯认为，扩大联合筹款委员会的权力将从根本上改变候选人的方向，从而更加强调从大型来源筹集资金的必要性。

This shift could have implications for policy outcomes. For instance, in 2024, the cryptocurrency magnates Tyler and Cameron Winklevoss gave approximately $2 million in bitcoin to Trump's joint fund-raising committee, tying the contribution to Trump's pledge to put an end to the Biden administration's war on crypto.

这种转变可能会对政策结果产生影响。例如，在2024年，加密货币大亨泰勒（Tyler）和卡梅隆·温克尔沃斯（Cameron Winklevoss）向特朗普的联合筹款委员会捐款了约200万美元，这与特朗普承诺的贡献联系在一起，以结束比登政府对加密货币的战争。

This joint fund-raising committee covered about $5 million in online ad costs for the Trump campaign. After Trump took office, Gary Gensler, the chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission and an advocate for crypto regulation, was fired.

这个联合筹款委员会涵盖了特朗普竞选活动约500万美元的在线广告费用。特朗普上任后，证券与交易委员会主席，加密法规的倡导者加里·金斯勒（Gary Gensler）被解雇。

However, Musk's disturbing role in the White House may be more indicative of the future. The world's richest man, with a net worth of nearly $300 billion, gained access to Trump'

但是，马斯克在白宫的令人不安的角色可能更能表明未来。世界上最富有的人，净资产近3000亿美元，可以进入特朗普