@jhs:
Thanks, I think that clarified it, it confirms what I thought, that with the licensing they have out there that an artist likely couldn’t prevent a politician from using a song, assuming he/she had gotten a license to do so. In some of the cases in the paper, the politician had not gotten the rights (I recall some candidated used “More than a Feeling” by Boston, and was using it without a license, claimed they had permission from a member of the band if I recall correctly, which explains why they had to stop using it).
@JHS thanks for that info. One tidbit you mentioned about cover songs answered a question I’ve had for a while. I always wondered about “open mic nights” when people get up and play at a coffeehouse.
I’m involved with a theatre and it is crazy the things that copyright or royalty holders can control. Right down to the size of the font on our posters!
I’m thinking the campaigns would have no problem getting Judas Priest to approve his song, “Tyrant”, and Elton John to approve his song, “The B… is Back”.
And for us peons, we probably don’t need Lauren Wood’s permission for, “Just Shoot Me”. Or is there a song, “I wanna go to sleep and not wake up for four years?” 
Copyright is one thing, but other issues may be involved if a political campaign appropriates a particular performance of a particular song as its campaign “theme song.” Think here of FDR’s use of “Happy Days Are Here Again,” or Bill Clinton’s use of Fleetwood Mac’s “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow,” or Barack Obama’s use of Stevie Wonder’s “Signed, Sealed, Delivered.” I assume these particular uses either were authorized or the artists didn’t object, because they continued throughout the candidates’ respective campaigns. But unauthorized use in that manner could in some states violate the musician’s right of publicity, or possibly give rise to a claim of trademark dilution under the federal Lanham Act. The problem is that this sort of repeated, high-visibility use of a particular song by a particular artist may create the false impression that the artist is endorsing or somehow connected to the candidate or the campaign. That’s not a copyright issue. Copyright licenses can cover the playing of random songs at campaign events. They don’t cover anything that smacks of an endorsement.
Here’s what ASCAP says about it:
Interesting thread that will be bumped up in 2020 when you-know-who runs for re-election against not-him-again.
I had a different copyright problem that still bugs me today. My co-author and I sent our book to the publishers to be printed. We chose a nice cover with a four photo collage of the person we were writing about that we paid a printer to put together. But one photo was from an Oklahoma newspaper that is still in business. So we wrote to them and asked for permission to use their photo.
The time came to print our copies and still no word from the newspaper so we called them. They sent us a letter stating they wanted $250 for the right to use their photo. In hindsight, we should have paid them but we were too stubborn and on a budget. Due to time constraints we were forced to scrap the cover and replace it with the worst cover you have ever seen. Every time I look at it I am embarrassed. We could have published the book using the photo and hoped we never got sued.
Maybe the newspaper will go out of business and we can do a second printing? :-w