In the News
National Review: McConnell Can Make Super PACs Obsolete
David Bossie
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell would like to repeal the limits on how much political parties may spend in coordination with their candidates. The congressional Freedom Caucus is skeptical of the proposal, because party spending is often heavily tilted toward “establishment” candidates. Other conservative groups, such as the Center for Competitive Politics, enthusiastically back the measure, saying the limits are unconstitutional. We at Citizens United agree that the limits on party spending ought to be repealed, but Senator McConnell’s proposal does not go nearly far enough. Now is the time for real campaign-finance reform that empowers the American electorate, not just the political-party apparatuses.
CCP
Coalition Letter in Support of “Fair Treatment for All Gifts Act” (H.R. 1104) in Tax Extenders Legislation
While it is true that the government may opt not to subsidize certain types of activities through tax exemptions or deductions, it may not burden expressive or associational activity through taxation, and the gift tax would present an enormous burden on 501(c)(4) groups. Were it applied, many donors would simply stop giving money to various causes, or would give only up to the annual exclusion of $14,000.
Smaller and less well-resourced nonprofits often rely on larger gifts to exist at all. To the extent the government would be putting some social welfare groups out of business through the imposition of the gift tax, it raises constitutional issues of the highest moment.
Additionally, imposing the gift tax on donors to nonprofit groups could present an unconstitutional condition. While, again, the government may choose not to subsidize certain activities through tax exemptions or deductions, it may not condition the exercise of a constitutional right—the freedom to associate with social welfare groups by donating money to them—on payment of the tax.
IRS
Washington Examiner: Meddling IRS overreaches again
Editorial Board
The agency has proposed new regulations that would for now permit (but not require) charities to file a new annual form that reports the name, address, and Social Security number of everyone who donates more than $250.
This is presented as a “simplification” of the rules for nonprofits. But it is far more likely to complicate their administrative processes than to simplify them. At best, this is a solution to something that no one thinks is a problem. Another left-liberal tendency is to ignore the wise lesson that if it ain’t broke don’t fix it.
At worst, however, the IRS plan probably looks forward to a future form on which the disclosure of donor details is mandatory, and thus could prompt donations to dry up.
Independent Groups
Washington Post: Emily’s List accuses Rep. Chris Van Hollen of going after its donors
Rachel Weiner
Van Hollen has repeatedly argued that effectiveness, not identity, should guide voters in this race and that his record on women’s rights is the stronger one.
But Emily’s List backs only female Democratic candidates who support abortion rights, and the group has gone after Van Hollen aggressively. With the primary more than four months away, the group has put $1 million into ads supporting Edwards. Van Hollen, in response, sent a fundraising email lamenting “dark money” and “misleading ads” — but never mentioned the group by name.
Van Hollen is far better funded than Edwards and has pressured her to give up any super PAC support. Edwards has defended her reliance on outside money, saying that as the underdog in the race, she needs help to compete. Polling has varied; the most recent survey from the Baltimore Sun gives Van Hollen a sizable lead.
Washington Examiner: Republicans aren’t the only ones receiving ‘dark money’
Richard Berman
With the presidential primaries right around the corner, we’re hearing a lot about “dark money” in politics — that is, political spending from deep-pocketed, undisclosed sources. Democrats claim it’s corrupting the political system and helping Republicans to boot. But they’re happy to play ball if it benefits approved left-wing causes.
Hillary Clinton ally David Brock has used his Media Matters vehicle to attack conservative advocacy groups for keeping their donors private. Other than Brock’s hypocrisy — his group doesn’t disclose its own donors — there’s really nothing nefarious about Americans privately supporting charities and causes that they believe in.
Wall Street Journal: Pro-Ted Cruz Groups Are Poised to Spend
Rebecca Ballhaus
Now, with the Texan surging in polls, that approach seems to have left him in a strong position.
Together, the four primary super PACs backing the senator have spent some $2.2 million, or less than 6% of the $38 million they raised in the first half of the year, according to Federal Election Commission records confirmed by a person familiar with the groups’ finances. That leaves them with more than $30 million to spend as the first nominating contest approaches Feb. 1.
FEC
More Soft Money Hard Law: Republishing Romney
Bob Bauer
The Campaign Legal Center was pleased that the Federal Election Commission had fined the independent Romney Super PAC for republishing a Romney campaign video, but it was disappointed that the penalty, $50,000, was low. Still, there was enforcement, as my colleague Marc Elias pointed out on Twitter.
It is a mixed triumph for the FEC. The agency got its settlement and collected a fine but also agreed with the Romney Super PAC that the law being applied had been unsettled and that PAC counsel had adopted a reasonable legal position in the absence of a clear rule or established interpretation.
Maybe the agency was being circumspect, paying its respects to the Romney PAC legal position as needed to induce a negotiated settlement. But the public record now contains an enforcement action in which the agency imposed a penalty for what it characterized as a reasonable legal position on an open question under the law.
FCC
NPR: Who Paid For This Political Ad? An 81-Year-Old Law Could Force The Answer
Peter Overby
It’s a fair bet that in 1934, five years into the Great Depression and a year into the New Deal, Congress wasn’t thinking about a political future that would be rife with secretly financed political groups.
But the Communications Act of 1934, the cornerstone of U.S. broadcasting law, may require superPACs, 501(c)(4) “social welfare” groups and other big political advertisers that operate separately from campaigns to identify the donors paying for their media blitzes.
Three groups advocating for better disclosure — the Campaign Legal Center, Common Cause and the Sunlight Foundation — are invoking the law against 18 TV stations in legal complaints at the Federal Communications Commission.
Influence
Huffington Post: Las Vegas Review-Journal Staffers Want To Know Who Owns Their Newspaper
Michael Calderone
Several staffers at the Review-Journal, the largest media outlet in Nevada, have questioned their new owner’s decision to remain secret, an unusual arrangement that’s stunned not only the newsroom, but journalists nationwide.
Sean Whaley, a capital bureau reporter based in Carson City, tweeted Saturday night that he was “offended & embarrassed” that the paper’s new owner — News + Media Capital Group LLC — has not disclosed its financial backers since announcing Thursday night that it had acquired the paper.
Donor Privacy
Politico: Inside the 2016 black market for donor emails
Shane Goldmacher
While it never says so in the emails from his old foes, or anywhere, the money that donors give isn’t necessarily all going to whichever smiling candidate is pictured on the site and writing the email. That is because Walker’s committee has struck secret deals with at least some of his old competitors to split the proceeds — unbeknownst to those doing the giving.
It’s part of the presidential campaign’s hidden world of digging for donors online, where so-called revenue-sharing agreements — rev-shares, for short — are skyrocketing in popularity.
Candidates and Campaigns
Bloomberg: How Trump Has Neutralized Super-PAC Cash
Michael C. Bender
“There’s really no precedent for the amount of free media that Trump is able to get,” said Richard Skinner, who studies money in politics for the Sunlight Foundation. “In part just because he’s a celebrity in a way we’ve really never seen before in a presidential candidate. His name ID is comparable to a sitting president. And this is his career. It’s what he’s been doing for the past several decades, which is generating lots and lots and lots of free media.”
Trump’s time on Fox News has dwarfed the competition. From May 1 through Dec. 10, he appeared for a total of 22 hours and 17 minutes, according to data compiled for Bloomberg by Media Matters for America, a liberal-leaning group in Washington. The candidate with the next biggest presence, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, clocked 9 hours and 50 minutes.
Milwaukee Journal Sentinel: Ted Cruz solicits donations to pay off Scott Walker’s campaign debt
Mary Spicuzza
“I stand with my friend @Scott Walker & hope you will too!” Cruz tweeted to his “#CruzCrew.”
Cruz then linked to a donation page for Walker’s campaign.
“Your contribution of $10, $35, $50, $100, $250, or more right now will help us pay down this campaign debt and officially close the books on our 2016 campaign,” the website reads. “And if you contribute $30 or more in the next three days, we will send you a limited edition lapel pin.”
The pin features the logo for Walker’s presidential campaign, which he ended on Sept. 21 in the face of dwindling funds and dropping poll numbers.
Washington Post: What happened to Carly Fiorina?
Abby Phillip
Fiorina gained a key opportunity this fall when she rose in the polls after two strong debate performances that showcased her direct delivery style and command of the issues. But with businessman Donald Trump monopolizing media attention, and without the deep campaign organization of the other leading candidates, Fiorina is seeing her opportunity slip away.
The States
Las Cruces Sun News: Duran gets 30 days in campaign finance case
Morgan Lee, Associated Press
Former New Mexico Secretary of State Dianna Duran, once among the state’s highest-ranking elected officials, wiped tears from her face Monday as she listened to a district judge outline what will be expected of her over the next five years as punishment in a campaign finance scandal.
For violating the very laws she was expected to uphold, Duran must hand-deliver letters of apology to political donors, write another letter to the citizens of New Mexico, perform thousands of hours of community service and make at least four public appearances each month for the next three years to share her story with school children and civic groups.
Salt Lake Tribune: Utah judge cancels 2016 public corruption trial for John Swallow
Jennifer Dobner
An April public corruption trial set for former Utah Attorney General John Swallow will be delayed. A judge on Monday canceled the meeting to allow his new defense lawyer time to prepare…
On Monday, Williams told 3rd District Judge Elizabeth Hruby-Mills he needs more time to plow through the two terabytes of evidence — known as discovery — he has received from prosecutors. More evidence is expected.
Getting through that volume of data cannot “happen anywhere near soon enough” to be prepared for the April 5 trial that had been scheduled, Williams said.
