In the News
Wall Street Journal: Not Even Reformers Can Follow Campaign-Finance Law
By Scott Blackburn‘Embrace the Irony.” That’s the slogan of Mayday PAC, the self-described “Super PAC to end all Super PACs” and brainchild of Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig. But there is unintended irony as well. Mayday PAC, which supports more campaign-finance regulations, repeatedly violated existing campaign-finance laws.In a complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission in late November, the Center for Competitive Politics, a nonprofit for which I work, reported 12 instances of political ads run by Mayday PAC that failed to include the legally mandated disclaimers, omitted information about the purchaser of the ad, or both. For example, in at least two television ads and eight radio ads run before New Hampshire’s Sept. 9 Republican primary (which favored U.S. Senate candidate Jim Rubens, who lost to Scott Brown ) the announcer failed to say that “Mayday PAC is responsible for the content of this advertising.”How can a law professor—a self-avowed campaign-finance expert who has maintained that he is “a strong supporter of disclosure legislation”—running a $10 million super PAC fail to follow the law? Responding to the Center for Competitive Politics complaint, Mr. Lessig wrote on his blog that no one “could be confused about whom the ad was from, and anyone who cared could identify whom the PAC was funded by.” Undoubtedly true. But why not follow the law as written?
Pro Publica: New IRS Rules on Dark Money Likely Won’t Be Ready Before 2016 Election
By Theodoric MeyerIt’s unknown how aggressive the IRS’ new proposal will be in attempting to rein in political activity by social welfare nonprofits. Some observers expect the agency to set a hard limit on how much of groups’ spending can be devoted to politics, perhaps 40 percent or less. Others think the limit will be higher — close to 50 percent — or that there won’t be a numerical limit at all.David Keating, president of the Center for Competitive Politics, which has called for less restrictive campaign finance regulations, said he doubted the rules would significantly affect the social welfare nonprofits that spend the most on elections, such as Crossroads GPS on the right and Patriot Majority USA on the left.“For the people who are pinning their hopes on IRS rules changing how these groups operate, I think they’re kidding themselves,” he said. “I don’t think it’s going to happen.”
More Soft Money Hard Law: Inexpensive Issues Speech and the Regulation of Impact
By Bob BauerIn another case, in Colorado, the question was whether an individual’s interest in keeping church and state separate led her to “issue committee” status, bringing with it a registration and reporting requirement that applies when two or more persons spend more than $200 on issues speech. Coalition for Secular Government v. Scott Gessler, No. 1:12-cv-01708, Doc. 49 (D. Colo. Oct. 10, 2014). The annual financial support she received from others for this project ranged from $200 to $3,500, and her primary interest was the distribution of a policy paper. The court hearing this challenge could not see how this activity, or the $200 spending threshold, somehow implicated the state’s interest in mandating disclose of “large campaign contributions” and in checking the “disproportionate level of influence” great wealth can buy. Id. at 11. It found that, as applied to the particular case, there was no such interest and the law failed. Id. at 11-12.
Independent Groups
Politico: Sources: Priorities snags Justin Brennan as finance director
By Maggie HabermanBut the most pressing task for Priorities is how to raise more than $200 million — and as much as $400 million — that its supporters believe it will require. The fundraising target has varied in conversations, but most people familiar with the group’s work put it at about $300 million.Priorities officials are said to be well aware of the difficulty in raising so much money. They also are concerned with how the new rider related to party fundraising, slipped into the recent “Cromnibus” bill, will affect their efforts in making pitches to donors.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
National Journal: Double Dip: How Rand Paul Can Legally Tap His Biggest Donors Twice
By Shane Goldmacher And Scott BlandPaul has said he plans to seek Senate reelection and, if he runs, the Republican presidential nomination simultaneously. And because he would be campaigning for two federal offices, he would be eligible to have two open federal campaign committees at the same time. Thus, his largest donors could give $2,600 to his presidential primary campaign and another $2,600 to his Senate account for the primary.While federal rules do limit how he could spend the money, veteran election lawyers say diligent accounting could allow for legal cost-sharing between the two committees, saving Paul’s presidential bid precious dollars and letting him collect bigger checks from his biggest contributors.
Politico: Jeb Bush fundraising apparatus ready for takeoff
By Anna Palmer and Kenneth P. VogelJeb Bush’s fundraising operation is about to get serious.Allies of the former Florida governor are planning to roll out both a leadership PAC and a super PAC in the coming days in an effort to lock up major donors and give pause to potential rivals for the 2016 GOP presidential nomination, according to several sources.They say the two PACs are planning their finance teams, as well as first quarter fundraising events, including some in Florida and one in Washington before the end of the month.
State and Local
California –– LA Times: State ethics agency has record number of enforcement actions in 2014
By Patrick McGreevyThe new records by the state Fair Political Practices Commission came in the same year that federal officials charged two state senators with bribery and a Los Angeles County jury found a third senator guilty of lying about living in his district.Unlike the criminal cases, the FPPC pursues administrative fines when public officials are found to have violated the Political Reform Act.In 2014, the agency closed 1,005 cases with proven violations, beating the previous high of 852.
Massachusetts –– MassLive: Changes to state campaign finance laws begin in 2015: higher donation limits but more timely disclosure
By Garrett QuinnThe increase to the state’s campaign finance limit was part of a bill passed earlier this year that required Super PACs involved in Massachusetts campaigns to disclose their donors in a more timely manner. Prior to the 2014 election Super PACs were not required to disclose their donors until after the election like they did in the 2013 Boston mayoral race.The new state law, currently in effect, requires Super PACs to disclose the identity of their donors within seven days of running an ad on television or radio. Additionally, the law requires the declaration of the identity of the top five donors to the Super PAC in the ad.
