Tag Archives: money in politics

Earmarks are Back, Baby!

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Why did so many Republicans vote for last week’s budget bill? One reason is that they wanted to avoid getting blamed for another government shutdown. As you’ll recall, the last one didn’t turn out so well. But Stan Collender says there’s another reason:

This is real inside-baseball: An omnibus appropriation provided an opportunity for the leadership to buy support from reluctant members by providing more dollars for their pet programs and projects. The demise of earmarks several years ago plus the use of continuing resolutions (which generally don’t provide dollars on a program-by-program basis) to fund the government took that ability away. This was the first appropriations bill in five years where that wasn’t the case.

More…. Virtually every Republican who voted for the bill got some dollars devoted to something, if not many things, that her or his constituents will be very happy to have. In other words, this was the first real return of earmarks since they were banned several years ago and even anti-spending members couldn’t resist.

Earmarks are back, baby! But really, I shouldn’t be so flippant about it. Nobody likes to see the sausage being made, but the truth is that earmarks are a useful part of the legislative process. Sure, they’re a little inefficient, and sure, they can get out of hand. But they don’t increase overall spending, and they do provide congressional leaders with a way to whip their troops into line. Human nature being what it is, leaders need at least a few carrots and sticks in order to get anything done, and this is something they’ve largely lost over the past few decades. It would be a good thing if they got some of them back.

Excerpt from: 

Earmarks are Back, Baby!

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Earmarks are Back, Baby!

New Koch-Linked Political Firm Aims to Handpick “Electable” Candidates

Mother Jones

A new political consulting firm with deep ties to the Koch brothers has quietly set up shop in Arlington, Virginia. Its mission: to prevent future Todd Akins and Richard Mourdocks from tanking the Republican Party’s electoral prospects. The firm, named Aegis Strategic, is run by a former top executive at Charles and David Koch’s flagship advocacy group, Americans for Prosperity, and it was founded with the blessing of the brothers’ political advisors, three Republican operatives tell Mother Jones.

The consulting firm plans to handpick local, state, and federal candidates who share the Kochs’ free-market, limited government agenda, and groom them to win elections. “We seek out electable advocates of the freedom and opportunity agenda who will be forceful at both the policy and political levels,” the company notes on its website. Aegis says it can manage every aspect of a campaign, including advertising, direct mail, social media, and fundraising.

Aegis’ president is Jeff Crank, a two-time failed Republican congressional candidate who ran the Colorado chapter of Americans for Prosperity and served as the chief operating officer of the national organization. The firm’s six-person staff boasts two others with connections to the Kochs. The group’s lead strategist is Karl Crow, a former project coordinator for the Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation, where he focused “on how political advocates for economic freedom are identified, trained, and promoted,” according to his bio on Aegis’ website. Crow, who was scheduled to speak at an invite-only Koch donor summit in 2010 on the subject of voter mobilization, subsequently worked for Themis, the Koch brothers’ voter microtargeting operation. Brad Stevens, the former state director for Americans for Prosperity-Nebraska, is Aegis’ director of candidate identification.

Crank has touted his firm’s connection to the Kochs in meetings with potential business partners, according to three people who’ve spoken with him about this new venture. They say he has promoted Aegis as having the approval of the Koch brothers’ political operatives. (A spokesman for Koch Industries did not respond to a request for comment about the Kochs’ ties to Aegis.)

In an interview, Crank downplayed his company’s Koch connections but did not dispute the accounts of those who say he mentioned Aegis’ Koch affiliation. “I think there’s some kind of an assumption that there is a Koch connection,” Crank said. “It’s not a large leap for anybody to make.” Crank said he launched Aegis after seeing Akin, Mourdock, and other Republican candidates bumble their way through the 2012 campaign and cost the GOP seats in Congress.

Aegis Strategic’s first client is Marilinda Garcia, a 31-year-old Republican serving her fourth term in the New Hampshire House of Representatives. Last November, she launched a bid for Congress, hoping to oust freshman Democrat Rep. Ann Kuster. Garcia, who has been loudly praised by her state’s Americans for Prosperity chapter, declined to comment. Crank told Mother Jones that Aegis will announce new clients in the coming months.

People who’ve spoken with Crank about Aegis say he told them that the firm has access to the Kochs’ formidable donor network, and Aegis’ website appears to allude to this. Noting the “services” it provides, the consultancy says that its fundraising team “takes on a limited number of candidates each election cycle and markets them to Aegis’ exclusive fundraising network.”

When asked about this statement, Crank questioned whether that language in fact appeared on Aegis’ website. When informed that it did, he called it “standard marketing stuff.”

As the Washington Post recently reported, the Kochs’ political network raised more than $400 million in 2011 and 2012 to defeat President Barack Obama, influence House and Senate races, and shape policy debates at the state and federal levels. The constellation of nonprofit groups used by the Kochs and their allies is mind-bendingly complex, seemingly designed to keep donors’ identities shielded from public scrutiny.

Aegis Strategic comes across as an effort by the Koch brothers’ allies to bring in-house the business of campaigns. On its website, Aegis bills itself as a one-stop shop for candidates who are “committed to freedom and economic opportunity,” offering candidates such services as opposition research, fundraising, direct mail, TV/radio/cable advertisements, phone banking, data management, and social media. The company’s office is located just blocks from Americans for Prosperity’s national headquarters, the offices of various Koch-funded foundations, and Freedom Partners, the primary vehicle for anonymous money raised by the Koch donor network.

Pledging to identify and train budding conservative and libertarian candidates, Aegis potentially fills a gap that the Kochs have previously identified in their political operation. Donors and activists who are active in the Koch network say there was widespread frustration following the 2012 elections, during which the GOP had fielded so many lackluster candidates. “You can spend all the money on a candidate you want, but if they’re talking about self-deportation, or betting $10,000, or 47 percent, you’re gonna lose,” says Stan Hubbard, a Minnesota-based radio and TV magnate who attends the Koch seminars. “You have a bad candidate, you’re gonna lose.”

At the Kochs’ April 2013 donor summit, the first since the 2012 elections, one major topic of conversation was “candidate recruitment and training,” according to an email previewing the summit that was first reported by Mother Jones. That preview, written by the Kochs’ top fundraiser Kevin Gentry, said that at the conference “a plan will be shared to help recruit more principled and effective advocates of free enterprise to run for office.”

A little over a month later, corporate records show, Aegis Strategic was officially incorporated in Delaware.

View article:  

New Koch-Linked Political Firm Aims to Handpick “Electable” Candidates

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on New Koch-Linked Political Firm Aims to Handpick “Electable” Candidates

Following the Dark Money Would Be Easier if This Goverment Agency Did Its Job

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

A recent headline over at the Atlantic captured the mood when it comes to the state of money in American politics: “There’s No Way to Follow the Money.” The author, former Reuters editor Lee Aitken, was referring to the web of “social welfare” nonprofit groups moving hundreds of millions of dollars in dark money all around the country with the goal, ultimately, of influencing elections and shaping policy. Aitken has a point: As deep as reporters dig, it’s harder than ever to track where the money’s going, how it’s being spent, and who’s taking a cut along the way.

Following the dark money isn’t any easier when timid or dysfunctional watchdogs plainly fail to do their jobs. Fingers point most often to the Federal Election Commission, which is at the moment an underfunded, ideologically divided, broken institution. But a new Sunlight Foundation analysis identifies another culprit: the Federal Communications Commission, the nation’s top cop when it comes to TV, radio, and broadband.

Here’s the back story: Tucked inside the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, a landmark piece of legislation better known as “McCain-Feingold” after its two sponsors, was a new requirement that local TV stations make available to the public information about political ad buys, including how much was spent and what candidates or issues were mentioned in the ad. Post-Citizens United, spending on political ads has exploded—$5.6 billion was spent in 2012, a 30 percent increase from 2008. Broadcasters’ ad data can provide journalists, campaign staffers, activists, and anyone else with detailed and useful information on the ads running all over the country.

The problem? TV stations are ignoring the law, leaving the public in the dark.

A Sunlight Foundation analysis of 200 randomly-chosen ad buys by PACs, super-PACs, or nonprofits found that fewer than one in six actually disclosed the name of the candidate or specific election referenced in the ad. The most important fields on the ad buy paperwork are blank, and the TV stations that are so eager to rake in all those revenues aren’t prodding the ad buyers to fully disclose what they’re doing.

The FCC could crack down on this if it wanted. Sunlight’s Jacob Fenton explains why the agency isn’t acting:

TV stations could be penalized for leaving out disclosure information, but the FCC has shown little appetite for doing so. Although occasional enforcement checks took place in the years after the reforms were adopted, more recently the FCC has fallen back on a “complaint driven” process. In other words, the agency won’t act unless someone asks it to. But because the vast majority of the political ad filings are hidden away in file cabinets at broadcast stations, available only during business hours when most voters are working, few people ever see them, let alone complain.

Steve Waldman, an Internet entrepreneur and journalist who worked as a senior advisor to former FCC chairman Julius Genachowski, said the nation’s communications watchdog was leery of getting stuck with the unenviable position of campaign cop. “When it comes to political stuff, there’s extra sensitivity at the commission because it’s the one area where Congress jumps up and down and says, ‘If you do that we’re going to come and slap you in the head,'” Waldman said.

Tom Wheeler, who just replaced Genachowski, saw his Senate confirmation vote held up by Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, over the issue of political ad disclosure. In a statement, Cruz said he lifted the hold after Wheeler said he’d make political ad funding disclosure “not a priority.”

It’s not all bad news on the political ad transparency front. In August, a judge ruled that the FCC could proceed with a plan to require several hundred broadcast stations located in the nation’s 50 largest cities to post their ad files online. Sunlight, among others, is working to make those files accessible and easily searchable to anyone with an Internet connection.

In the campaign finance world, that’s progress. But it’s enough. The FCC and the TV stations themselves need to feel more pressure to ensure that those ad files comply with the law. It’s one of the few useful tools we have nowadays for following that shadowy money trail.

Original article: 

Following the Dark Money Would Be Easier if This Goverment Agency Did Its Job

Posted in alo, Casio, Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, Landmark, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Following the Dark Money Would Be Easier if This Goverment Agency Did Its Job

David O. Russell: Political Corruption in "American Hustle" Is Nothing Compared to Citizens United

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

On Tuesday, the famously mercurial writer/director David O. Russell was in Washington, DC, for a special screening and Q&A session for his critically acclaimed, award-winning new film American Hustle. MSNBC host Chris Matthews moderated the Q&A, and Chris Dodd (the former Democratic senator and current chairman of the Motion Picture Association of America, the de facto censorship board for cinema in the United States) introduced Russell.

American Hustle—starring Christian Bale, Bradley Cooper, Amy Adams, and Jennifer Lawrence—is loosely based on events surrounding Abscam, a sting operation the FBI launched in the late ’70s to target trafficking in stolen property. The bureau recruited con artist Melvin Weinberg to help craft and execute the operation, which involved setting up Abdul Enterprises, a fake company funded by fictitious Arab sheiks who offered to bribe people to pave the way for a new casino in Atlantic City. The operation morphed into an investigation of political corruption when politicians started approaching Abdul Enterprises for money. By the early ’80s, Abscam had led to the conviction of one senator and six congressmen, among other political figures and officials. (The late Democratic congressman and Vietnam War vet John Murtha was also embroiled in the scandal, but escaped indictment and prosecution.)

Continue Reading »

Taken from:

David O. Russell: Political Corruption in "American Hustle" Is Nothing Compared to Citizens United

Posted in Citizen, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on David O. Russell: Political Corruption in "American Hustle" Is Nothing Compared to Citizens United

4 Reasons Obama’s New Dark-Money Rules Won’t Stop Dark Money

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Last week, the Internal Revenue Service, led by an appointee of President Obama’s, and the Treasury Department sent shock waves throughout the political world by unveiling a new set of proposed regulations intended to clamp down on secretly funded nonprofits known as 501(c)(4) groups. Big-name 501(c)(4)s include Karl Rove’s Crossroads GPS, the League of Conservation Voters, Grover Norquist’s Americans for Tax Reform, and the pro-Obama Priorities USA. In the 2012 election season, 501(c)(4) groups spent $310 million, up from $5 million in 2006, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The government’s new proposals are an attempt at stemming that tide of secret spending. In some corners, the proposals were hailed a smart first step; in others, a dangerous intrusion on taxpayers’ free-speech rights. But on closer examination, tax lawyers and election experts say, the Obama administration’s proposals won’t plug the spigot of dark money pouring into US elections. Here are four reasons why.

Continue Reading »

Link to original:

4 Reasons Obama’s New Dark-Money Rules Won’t Stop Dark Money

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on 4 Reasons Obama’s New Dark-Money Rules Won’t Stop Dark Money

DonorsTrust—the Right’s Dark-Money ATM—Pumps Out Record $96 Million

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

DonorsTrust is the conservative movement’s little-known but hugely influential cash machine, a conduit for millions of dollars in anonymous donations to anti-union legal shops, climate change deniers, pro-life advocates, libertarian think tanks, media watchdog groups, and a panoply of other right-leaning causes. Wealthy conservatives use DonorsTrust as a surefire way to invest their money, fingerprint-free, with the assurance it will end up in the right hands. According to new tax filings obtained by Mother Jones, DonorsTrust is growing increasingly popular among the bankrollers of the conservative movement.

Last year, DonorsTrust (and its sister group, Donors Capital Fund) doled out a record $96 million, making it one of the largest honeypots for right-leaning groups. That’s an increase from $85 million in 2011 and $78 million in 2010. DonorsTrust CEO Whitney Ball, who cofounded the group in 1999 and sometimes appears at the Koch brothers’ donor summits, says the increased giving stems from her organization’s growing profile and also conservative donors’ anger at the Obama administration. And despite worries about donor burnout within the conservative ranks, Ball says DonorsTrust is on track for another great year in 2013.

Continue Reading »

See original article: 

DonorsTrust—the Right’s Dark-Money ATM—Pumps Out Record $96 Million

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on DonorsTrust—the Right’s Dark-Money ATM—Pumps Out Record $96 Million

Watchdog: Grover Norquist’s Group Misled IRS About Its 2012 Political Spending

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Americans for Tax Reform, the conservative advocacy group run by activist Grover Norquist, plunged headlong into federal elections in 2012, urging voters in California, Colorado, and Ohio to oust Democratic lawmakers. In all, ATR told the Federal Election Commission that it spent nearly $16 million last year on independent expenditures—political ads urging voters to support or defeat a particular candidate that aren’t coordinated with any candidates or parties.

Norquist’s group recently submitted its 2012 tax filing to the IRS, detailing all its spending for last year. In that filing, ATR says it spent just $9.8 million on politics in 2012—a difference of some $6 million compared to what ATR told the FEC.

On Tuesday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, a nonpartisan watchdog group, seized on that discrepancy in a complaint filed with the IRS and Justice Department. CREW alleges that Norquist’s group misled the IRS about the extent of its political spending.

ATR may have had reason to low-ball the political spending figures it reported to the IRS. Norquist’s group is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, also known as a social welfare organization. Under the tax law, 501(c)(4) nonprofits such as ATR—which do not have to disclose their donors—can wade into campaigns and elections but cannot spend a majority of their money on political activities. From only reading ATR’s 2012 tax filing, the group appears to abide by that restriction: ATR reported spending a total of $30 million in 2012, only $9.8 million of which went toward politicking. No issue there.

But if ATR in fact spent nearly $16 million of its $30 million budget on politicking, as CREW claims it did, then that’s a different story. “ATR’s own IRS and FEC filings provide incontrovertible evidence that ATR is breaking the law,” CREW executive director Melanie Sloan said in a statement. “If Al Capone could be nailed for tax violations, so can Grover Norquist.”

ATR spokesman John Kartch says CREW’s complaint is “baseless” and “nonsense.” He added, “Americans for Tax Reform’s reporting strictly abides by the definitions of political activity and political expenditures maintained by the FEC and IRS.”

Read CREW’s complaint against ATR:

DV.load(“//www.documentcloud.org/documents/836578-crew-november-2013-complaint-against-americans.js”,
width: 640,
height: 600,
sidebar: false,
text: false,
pdf: false,
container: “#DV-viewer-836578-crew-november-2013-complaint-against-americans”
);

This isn’t the first time CREW has accused Norquist and ATR of misleading the IRS. In March 2012, the watchdog claimed that ATR failed to report to the IRS more than $2 million in political spending in 2010. (The group told the FEC it spent $4.2 million on independent expenditures, but it told the IRS its political outlays were just $1.85 million.) Neither the Justice Department nor the IRS has responded to CREW’s 2012 complaint.

Nor is the ATR the only political group facing questions about its tax filings. The Center for Public Integrity recently reported that an anti-Obama nonprofit with ties to the Koch brothers, the American Energy Alliance, told the IRS it engaged in no “direct or indirect political campaign activities on behalf of or in opposition to candidates for public office” in 2012. Yet the group spent more than $1 million on TV ads in Virginia and Ohio last fall urging viewers to “vote no on Obama’s failing energy policy.” An American Energy Alliance spokesman said the ads were in no way political, but Marcus Owens, a former IRS official, said the group’s tax filing “certainly raises a red flag.”

Original post – 

Watchdog: Grover Norquist’s Group Misled IRS About Its 2012 Political Spending

Posted in Citizen, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Watchdog: Grover Norquist’s Group Misled IRS About Its 2012 Political Spending

Leaked Documents Reveal the Secret Finances of a Pro-Industry Science Group

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The American Council on Science and Health bills itself as an independent research and advocacy organization devoted to debunking “junk science.” It’s a controversial outfit—a “group of scientists…concerned that many important public policies related to health and the environment did not have a sound scientific basis,” it says—that often does battle with environmentalists and consumer safety advocates, wading into public health debates to defend fracking, to fight New York City’s attempt to ban big sugary sodas, and to dismiss concerns about the potential harms of the chemical bisphenol-A (better known at BPA) and the pesticide atrazine. The group insists that its conclusions are driven purely by science. It acknowledges that it receives some financial support from corporations and industry groups, but ACSH, which reportedly stopped disclosing its corporate donors two decades ago, maintains that these contributions don’t influence its work and agenda.

Yet internal financial documents (read them here) provided to Mother Jones show that ACSH depends heavily on funding from corporations that have a financial stake in the scientific debates it aims to shape. The group also directly solicits donations from these industry sources around specific issues. ACSH’s financial links to corporations involved in hot-button health and safety controversies have been highlighted in the past, but these documents offer a more extensive accounting of ACSH’s reliance on industry money—giving a rare window into the operations of a prominent and frequent defender of industry in the science wars.

Continue Reading »

Jump to original:  

Leaked Documents Reveal the Secret Finances of a Pro-Industry Science Group

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Leaked Documents Reveal the Secret Finances of a Pro-Industry Science Group

California Watchdog: “Koch Brothers Network” Behind $15 Million Dark-Money Donations

Mother Jones

On Thursday, the California attorney general and the state’s top election watchdog named the “Koch brothers network” of donors and dark-money nonprofits as the true source of $15 million in secret donations made last year to influence two bitterly fought ballot propositions in California. State officials unmasked the Kochs’ network as part of a settlement deal that ends a nearly year-long investigation into the source of the secret donations that flowed in California last fall.

As part of the deal, two Arizona-based nonprofits, the Koch-linked Center to Protect Patients Rights and Americans for Responsible Leadership, admitted violating state election law. The settlement mandates that the two nonprofits pay a $1 million fine to California’s general fund, and the committees who received the secret donations at the heart of the case must also cut a check to the state for the amount of those donations, which totaled $15.08 million.

Continue Reading »

See original article – 

California Watchdog: “Koch Brothers Network” Behind $15 Million Dark-Money Donations

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on California Watchdog: “Koch Brothers Network” Behind $15 Million Dark-Money Donations

Business Community Offers Its Final Comment on Debt Ceiling Debacle: Whatevs

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

The Washington Post reports that over the past few years, business groups have heavily bankrolled the conservative Republicans who voted against raising the debt ceiling last week. That’s no surprise. The bigger question is what they’re going to do in the future. Will they continue to support tea party firebrands who threaten the U.S. economy and the health of the business community by playing games with the debt ceiling?

The chief lobbyist for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Bruce Josten, said the debt-ceiling roll call would be only one of many factors considered by the Chamber when it decides which candidates to support in 2014.

“Everyone has their own number one issue, and in the Chamber’s membership, again unlike any other association, we have a lot of members with a lot of different number one issues,” Josten said.

Similarly, Scott Talbott, senior vice president for policy at the Financial Services Roundtable, said: “This vote will be a factor in the future before we make contributions, though it will not necessarily determine the outcome.

….Lobbyists say they are also aware that some of the Republicans may have voted against raising the debt ceiling to give themselves political cover from angry tea party constituents, knowing there were enough votes to avoid a default.

Well, that ought to put the fear of God into them! Something tells me that these tea party heroes are getting a somewhat clearer message from groups like Heritage and Club for Growth, that are on the other side of this issue. This story make it pretty obvious that the Chamber of Commerce has no real intention of punishing anyone who voted against the debt ceiling increase; has no real beef with the tea party wing of the GOP; and has accepted that its role is to oppose Democrats but otherwise STFU. Everyone hoping for a bit more adult supervision in the Republican Party is going to have to look elsewhere.

View original: 

Business Community Offers Its Final Comment on Debt Ceiling Debacle: Whatevs

Posted in FF, GE, LG, ONA, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Business Community Offers Its Final Comment on Debt Ceiling Debacle: Whatevs