[EL] Business Week story about DreamWorks marketing team assisting Messina (Pres. Obama's campaign manager)
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Thu Jun 14 11:59:34 PDT 2012
From the FEC's brochure on volunteer activity:
http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/volact.shtml#corporate
*I work in a corporate office. Can I conduct campaign-related volunteer
work while at the office?*
In general, if an individual provides services to a campaign during paid
working hours, the employer is making a contribution. 11 CFR 100.54
<http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2011/janqtr/11cfr100.54.htm>.
However, if you are an employee, stockholder or member of a corporation
or labor organization you may use the organization's facilities during
paid working hours. For example, an employee could use the office phone
to make calls pertaining to political volunteer work, but the activity
must not interfere with the employee's work or the organization's normal
activity.
In order for the activity not to be counted as a contribution, the
Commission suggests limiting the activity to "incidental use" of the
corporate facilities. Incidental use is considered to be one hour a
week or four hours a month. 11 CFR 114.9(a)(1) and (b)(1)
<http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2011/janqtr/11cfr114.9.htm>. If the
activity exceeds incidental use or the individual uses the
organization's equipment to produce campaign materials, the individual
must reimburse the organization within a commercially reasonable time.
The reimbursement is considered a contribution from the individual to
the political committee and must be reported. 11 CFR 114.9(a)(2), (b)(2)
and (c) <http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2011/janqtr/11cfr114.9.htm>.
*Can I conduct volunteer Internet activity from my corporate office?*
Yes, an individual can conduct volunteer Internet activity at work as
long as the individual complies with the employer's rules for personal
use of computers and Internet access. This kind of activity can include
anything from forwarding political emails to signing up to work at a
candidate fundraiser. The individual must complete the normal amount of
work for which the individual is paid and the activity must not increase
the overhead or operating costs of the organization. In addition, the
Internet activity cannot be coerced or conditioned upon being used for
particular candidates. 11 CFR 100.94
<http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2011/janqtr/11cfr100.94.htm>,
114.9(a)(2)(ii) and (b)(2)(ii)
<http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2011/janqtr/11cfr114.9.htm>.
On 6/14/2012 10:44 AM, Scarberry, Mark wrote:
>
> Joe,
>
> On your first point, all I can say is "duh." Of course Citizens United
> didn't affect contribution rules; I try to make that point whenever I
> can, so I don't know how I could have made that mistake!
>
> For the rest of it, thanks for confirming what I thought was the case,
> that if the marketing team provided services at the direction of their
> corporate boss, then that would be considered a corporate contribution.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Mark
>
> Mark S. Scarberry
>
> Professor of Law
>
> Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
>
> *From:*Joe La Rue [mailto:joseph.e.larue at gmail.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 14, 2012 10:33 AM
> *To:* Scarberry, Mark
> *Cc:* law-election at uci.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Business Week story about DreamWorks marketing
> team assisting Messina (Pres. Obama's campaign manager)
>
> Mark,
>
> Even /post Citizens United/, corporations are prohibited from making
> contributions to candidates, whether direct or in-kind. /Citizens /did
> nothing to change that. A corporation may, however, offer its services
> to a candidate so long as the candidate pays the fair market value for
> the services. Employees and officers of corporations are free to make
> contributions /up to the contribution limits/, of course. But under
> current federal law the corporation itself may not make contributions.
>
> So this article really raises only four questions. First, did
> Spielberg offer advice in his private capacity or as an extension of
> DreamWorks? (I think it would be hard to argue that he's an extension
> of a corporation; therefore, I think his advice has to be considered
> private). Second, does advice from one person to another, offered in a
> private conversation, count as a contribution, such that a monetary
> value must be attached to it to determine whether one has given 'too
> much advice' and violated the applicable contribution limit? (I don't
> know the answer to this, not having researched it; but, I find it
> difficult to conceive that private advice would be counted as a
> contribution). Third, did the DreamWorks employees offer advice as
> private individuals, or was it offered within the scope of their
> employment? This is, I think, the key question: for, if they acted
> within the scope of their DreamWork employment because a DreamWork
> executive told them to do so, then this seems to be an illegal in-kind
> contribution.
>
> Finally, here's another key question: why is it Democrats are so
> worried that corporate money is going to go to SuperPACs supporting
> Romney? Obama did quite well with donations from corporate executives
> in 2008. Might it be because Democrats realize that Obama's policies
> have been bad for business? And, if Obama's policies are bad for
> business, aren't they also, by extension, likely bad for job creation?
>
> Joe
> ___________________
> *Joseph E. La Rue*
>
> cell: 480.272.2715
> email: joseph.e.larue at gmail.com <mailto:joseph.e.larue at gmail.com>
>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any
> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
> contain confidential and privileged information or otherwise be
> protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or
> distribution is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of
> the original message.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 10:14 AM, Scarberry, Mark
> <Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu <mailto:Mark.Scarberry at pepperdine.edu>>
> wrote:
>
> From Business Week
> (http://www.businessweek.com/printer/articles/30696-obamas-ceo-jim-messina-has-a-president-to-sell):
>
> "At DreamWorks Studios, Steven Spielberg spent three hours explaining
> how to capture an audience's attention and offered a number of ideas
> that will be rolled out before Election Day. An early example of
> Spielberg's influence is RomneyEconomics.com, a website designed by
> the Obama team to tell the story---a horror story, by their
> reckoning---of Mitt Romney's career at Bain Capital. Afterward,
> Spielberg insisted that Messina sit down with the DreamWorks marketing
> team. Hollywood movie studios are expert, as presidential campaigns
> also must be, at spending huge sums over a few weeks to reach and
> motivate millions of Americans."
>
> Pre-Citizens United, would free consulting from a corporation's
> marketing team, at the CEO's direction, be an illegal corporate
> contribution? I'm not that familiar with rules about in-kind
> contributions. Spielberg as an individual surely had the right to
> provide free advice to Messina, without it being counted against
> contribution limits, right? I suppose the members of the DreamWorks
> marketing team might have volunteered as individuals, rather than as a
> corporation's employees, to provide these consulting services, but the
> story suggests that they did so at Spielberg's direction.
>
> Mark S. Scarberry
>
> Professor of Law
>
> Pepperdine Univ. School of Law
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> <mailto:Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
--
Rick Hasen
Chancellor's Professor of Law and Political Science
UC Irvine School of Law
401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
Irvine, CA 92697-8000
949.824.3072 - office
949.824.0495 - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu
http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
http://electionlawblog.org
Pre-order The Voting Wars: http://amzn.to/y22ZTv
www.thevotingwars.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120614/1e5b0427/attachment.html>
View list directory