Betcha there will be bunches of dead conservative rich cats who will be rolling in their graves [snort]

...................................................................................................................................................................
Heirs may shift political spending
By Darrell M. West, August 15, 2014

The recent death of Richard Mellon Scaife marks the start of a massive transfer of politically focused wealth to a new generation. For those who might have forgotten, Scaife was the Charles and David Koch of the 1990s.

He used his wealth to influence the political process. He is most famous for funding investigations into Bill and Hillary Clinton throughout that decade and popularizing the strategy that came to be known as "the politics of personal destruction." In many respects, his efforts, which Hillary Clinton called a "vast right-wing conspiracy," were precursors of the highly polarizing attack-oriented politics that we see today.

Today, many wealthy individuals are deeply involved in politics. They have billions of dollars at work, pioneering new models of political engagement that combine direct electoral advocacy, issue advocacy, politically oriented philanthropy and the purchase of major news media organizations.

Yet many of these individuals are elderly and facing the prospect of an intergenerational wealth transfer. According to Forbes magazine, 60 percent of the world's 1,645 billionaires are older than 60. Collectively, they control nearly $6.4 trillion in financial assets.

Many of the 492 American billionaires are well into their 80s, which means that soon there is going to be an asset reallocation that will have a substantial political impact.

THE CLOCK'S TICKING

The big question is whether their children will support the same causes.

Consider Harold Simmons, the generous supporter of conservative political causes who passed away in December. In 2012, he contributed $18 million to political action committees seeking to defeat President Obama. Simmons told The Wall Street Journal that the president was "the most dangerous American alive ... because he would eliminate free enterprise in this country."

With his death, much of his philanthropic empire has passed to his daughters, Serena Simmons Connelly and Lisa Simmons. These daughters have dramatically different policy priorities from their father and have long supported Democratic and progressive causes, including the presidential campaigns of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Wal-Mart heiress Alice Walton has raised eyebrows with her recent $25,000 contribution to the Ready for Hillary super PAC. Most of the family has a history of supporting conservative causes and Republican candidates.

Indeed, it was President George H.W. Bush who awarded family patriarch Sam Walton the Presidential Medal of Freedom. But his daughter Alice has encouraged Hillary Clinton to seek the presidency, and grandson Sam Walton donated $300,000 to Obama's Priorities USA Action super PAC in 2012.

In looking at the history of philanthropy, it is not unusual for children to have different perspectives from their parents. Ted Turner's son Teddy ran as a conservative Republican in a South Carolina congressional race. He told GOP audiences that he doesn't agree with his father on many issues and joked that "you can't pick your parents."

Right now, much of the billionaire political activism has been on the conservative side. In 2012, six of the top ten contributors to super PACS gave $168 million to GOP candidates, while four favored Democrats for a total of $42 million.

Not surprisingly, many conservatives say there should be few restrictions on political advocacy by the super rich.

But on many political issues, young people are noticeably more liberal than their parents. This clearly is the case on social issues such as marriage equality, abortion rights and immigration reform. It is also true for environmental protection.

DEREGULATORY REGRET

When conservative wealth passes to more liberal children, it could have dramatic political consequences. Many conservatives applaud billionaires who spend hundreds of millions of dollars advocating conservative solutions to policy issues. They support Supreme Court decisions that have blown gaping holes in campaign-finance disclosure rules. They ignore blatant conflicts of interest between big money and the policy process in areas such as taxes and regulation.

When large wealth passes to the next generation, though, conservatives will start to understand the threat posed by big money in American politics. They may rue the day they encouraged wealthy benefactors to enter the political arena without required disclosure or transparency.
...................................................................................................................................................................