>From the Roll Call coverage of today's FEC meeting:
Commissioners also rejected a narrower-proposed rules change to the
existing allocation ratios (the split of soft and hard money that 527s
use to pay for their expenses) with a 3-3 deadlock. At least four
commissioners must vote in the affirmative to carry a motion at the
watchdog agency.
Trevor Potter
-----Original Message-----
From: Vewu@aol.com [mailto:Vewu@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 4:18 PM
To: Trevor Potter; MFORSYTHE@bloomberg.net; Rick.Hasen@lls.edu;
election-law@majordomo.lls.edu
Subject: Re: FW: RNC Statement on Today's FEC Decision
Mr. Potter states below that the Commission "deadlocked today". I would
like to note for the record that the Commission did not deadlock. The
bipartisan majority voted 2-4 (Toner and Thomas - McDonald, Weintraub,
Smith, Mason) not to adopt the proposed regulations.
Victoria Wu
Office of Chairman Smith
Federal Election Commission
202-694-1012
In a message dated 5/13/2004 3:53:41 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
TP@capdale.com writes:
I agree with Mike Forsythe that the RNC statement today on 527s
(below) IS strongly worded-but I also think it is partially incorrect.
The FEC deadlocked today and did not adopt new regulations. It did
not, however, vote to revoke the existing regulations --and it does
not have the power to rewrite the statute. Groups whose major purpose
is to elect or defeat federal candidates are still covered by the law.
If GOP groups take the approach Democratic groups have done, they also
will have FEC enforcement complaints filed against them. If the FEC
fails to act against either DEM or GOP groups, that failure to act is
reviewable by the federal courts.
The RNC's statements that these 527s are "clearly illegal" will be
used in court against GOP groups just as well as against Democratic
groups. No one should think the FEC's failure to pass a regulation
today settles the matter for the 2004 cycle, or disposes of the
enforcement complaints already before the FEC's General Counsel on the
Democratic groups (and ready to be filed against any new GOP groups).
Further, the fact that the FEC did not approve a regulation that would
clarify the major purpose test still allows the FEC (or a reviewing
Court, if necessary) to find that some groups are violating the law
and existing regulations even without new regulations clarifying
supposed gray areas.
In sum, the battle over 527s is not over--it enters a new phase.
Anyone who thinks the FEC's inaction today settles the matter legally
and opens the door to more 527 activity will be in for an unpleasant
surprise.
Trevor Potter
President and General Counsel, Campaign Legal Center
-----Original Message-----
From: MICHAEL FORSYTHE, BLOOMBERG/ WASHINGTO
[mailto:MFORSYTHE@bloomberg.net]
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 3:30 PM
Subject: Fwd: FW: Statement on Today's FEC Decision
Wow. What a strongly worded statement. Mike Forsythe
----- Original Message -----
From: Christine Iverson - Communications
At: 5/13 15:11
-----Original Message-----
From: Christine Iverson - Communications
Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2004 3:04 PM
To: Christine Iverson - Communications
Subject: Statement on Today's FEC Decision
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT:
Christine
Iverson
Thursday, May 13, 2004
202-863-8614
Joint Statement by Bush-Cheney Campaign Chairman Marc Racicot and RNC
Chairman Ed Gillespie on Today's FEC Ruling on 527 Groups
"The FEC's decision today to do nothing to stop the massive spending
of soft money "527" committees to influence the 2004 elections is
unfortunate, but provides clarity.
"It has always been clear to us that the Bipartisan Campaign Reform
Act
("BCRA") and its subsequent affirmation by the Supreme Court would
limit
the role of political parties in the political process and allow
special
interest "527" groups to proliferate. We had always assumed however,
that the provisions of the Federal Election Campaign Act that have
existed since the 1970's and were not changed by BCRA would require
the
527s to follow the basic tenants underlying federal campaign finance
law.
"We erroneously thought "527" groups would be regulated by their
status and their activities. We expected that when one of these "527"
groups raised and spent more than $1,000 for the specific purpose of
defeating or electing federal candidates such as President Bush or
John Kerry, that particular "527" group would fall under the Federal
Election Commission's umbrella as a federal political committee. In
other words, the "527" would have to spend and raise federally
regulated money, "hard dollars." No corporate money could be raised
nor spent and individual contributions would be limited to $5,000 per
year.
"Today's decision to delay addressing fundamental questions regarding
the regulation of "527's" is irresponsible. It also sets the stage for
a total meltdown of federal campaign finance regulation in 2004 - the
first election after BCRA supposedly banned soft money from
influencing federal candidates and elections.
"The Commission by its own action, or more precisely inaction, today
has given the "green light" to all non-federal "527's" to forge full
steam ahead in their efforts to affect the outcome of this year's
Federal elections and, in particular, the presidential race.
"Conservative groups now have the go-ahead they were waiting for as
the commission has now made clear that these "527"groups will not be
affected by the federal campaign finance rules, at least in 2004.
"As FEC Commissioner Michael Toner said, "Delaying a decision is
making a decision-namely, that we are not going to issue any
regulations for the 2004 elections. We are going to see a new 'soft
money' arms race for the 2004 election." (Delay Urged for FEC Action
on Pro-Democratic Groups, Washington Post, 5/12/04)
"Look at the blatant anti-President Bush and pro-Kerry activity by
MoveOn.org, The Media Fund, ACT and others. Add in their uninhibited
coordination with agents of the Kerry campaign and the Democratic
Party at the national and state levels. Remember that all of this
information was known to the FEC during its "527" rulemaking
deliberations.
"By today's action, the FEC has sanctioned the activities of these
groups. Its decision sends a very clear signal to the political
community -- let the "527" battle begin.
"The 2004 elections will now be a free-for-all. Thanks to the
deliberate inaction by the Federal Election Commission, the battle of
the 527's is likely to escalate to a full scale, two-sided war.
"Groups like the Leadership Forum, Progress for America, The
Republican Governor's Association, GOPAC and others now know that they
can legally engage in the same way Democrat leaning groups like ACT,
the Media Fund, MoveOn and Moving America Forward have been engaging.
"Now that the Commission has spoken, or not spoken, it is all but
certain that those groups that would like to see the President
re-elected and the U.S. House and Senate remain in Republican control
will begin raising and spending money in the same manner as those
groups that would like to see the President defeated and the U.S.
House and Senate in Democratic control have already been doing. Thanks
to the Federal Election Commission, the "527" battle will now rage
unabated through Election Day."
###
Paid for by the Republican National Committee
310 First Street SE, Washington, DC 20003 - (202) 863-8614 -
www.gop.com Not authorized by any candidate or candidate committee.
<- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ->
This message is for the use of the intended recipient only. It is
from a law firm and may contain information that is privileged and
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient any disclosure,
copying, future distribution, or use of this communication is
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
advise us by return e-mail, or if you have received this communication
by fax advise us by telephone and delete/destroy the document.
<- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ->
This message is for the use of the intended recipient only. It is
from a law firm and may contain information that is privileged and
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient any disclosure,
copying, future distribution, or use of this communication is
prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
advise us by return e-mail, or if you have received this communication
by fax advise us by telephone and delete/destroy the document.