‘it’s time to set the record straight. No matter how you slice it, corporations are spending unprecedented sums in this campaign.”

And we know that because… ? Well, apparently because Carney supports this assertion with the following:

1. $30 million of money raised by Super PACs comes from for profit-businesses.

2. Corporate CEOs have contributed to Super PACs.

3. “politically active nonprofits… are spending millions of dollars from undisclosed donors – many of which could well be big corporations.”

4. Aetna contributed $3.3. million to American Action Network and $4.5 million to the U.S. Chamber, groups which spend some money on political activity (did anyone not know that the Chamber was a major player before this cycle?)

That’s it, to support the assertion that “No matter how you slice it, corporations are spending unprecedented sums in this campaign.”

Of course, #2 above is not corporate money at all, it is individual money. Number three is mere speculation – hardly the basis for “set[ting] the record straight.” And numbers 1, 3 (which we’ll allow for good measure), and 4 don’t even come close to proving Carney’s point – unless she is limiting “campaign” spending to “express advocacy,” in which case there is no record to “set straight” – everyone agrees that corporations are spending “unprecedented sums” on express advocacy (at least unprecedented since 1947) because from 1947 through 2010 corporations were prohibited from express advocacy in campaigns. That’s what Citizens United was all about. So if that’s her point, she’s merely stating the obvious – why would that merit a column suggesting there is some record to be “set straight”?

But if she wants to include broader spending – as reformers usually do – then she hasn’t begun to prove her case, because she’s not even mentioned how much corporations contributed in party soft money prior to the 2004 cycle, or how much nonprofits spent in non-express advocacy, which they could do at any time prior to the 2004 cycle, more than 60 days out from the general or 30 days out from the primary in the 2004 campaign, and for most intents and purposes at any time in the 2008 campaign (after Wisconsin Right to Life II). For example, in 2004, forgetting about 501(c)(4) and (c)(6)nonprofits, “527s” alone spent approximately $600 million. In 2000, the parties alone raised approximately $400 million in “soft money,” with of course much more being spent by 527s and other nonprofits. Some of that money, obviously (and to use Carney’s standard), “could well be big corporations,” and still more could have come from “corporate CEOs.”

In any case, we consider it a good thing to have more voices and more talk about politics being heard, and we’ll give Carney her due: she recognizes that possibility in this column. That, we think, is progress.