I'm tuning into this only sporadically (on poorly timed vacation) but have 2
questions -- maybe already answered, + not intended as gotchas, just trying
to get some of the legal, uh, intricacies.
1 - When Bush laid out his principles of cmpn fin reform early in '01, he
wanted to limit corporate + union soft money but not individual contribs.
Anyone remember if that was purely in the context of party ctte giving or
stretched into other domains -- eg, 527s?
2 - Now that MoveOn is doing ads thru its PAC, not its 527, just how
'shadowy' is it? How vulnerable in the McCain-Bush-Cheney FEC challenge?
Cheers.
P. Overby
-----Original Message-----
From: Lowenstein, Daniel <lowenstein@law.ucla.edu>
To: election-law@majordomo.lls.edu <election-law@majordomo.lls.edu>
Sent: Thu Aug 26 21:04:04 2004
Subject: FW: Bush on 527s
I don't wish to discourage those who find this interesting, but my own
opinion is that this question has received much more attention on this list
than it deserves. What is the point of trying to parse the President's
words--certainly rehearsed, but also spontaneous in the sense of responding
to particular questions--in the light of distinctions that he surely did not
have in mind, that he probably doesn't even understand, and that no
president ought to be expected to understand?.
It must be obvious to everyone that President Bush does not wish to
silence the parties, his own campaign organizations, and many of the other
groups that are tax exempt under Section 527. No doubt he is (or was) quite
sincere about wishing to shut down the Democratic groups that are attacking
him and supporting Kerry, and that surely do reflect a type of financial
activity that in a general sense supporters of BCRA argued would be
prevented. His recent statements clearly reflect a desire to finesse the
issue of the content of the Swift boat ads. (Look at the responses in the
excerpt below that Marty posted, though they are not Bush speaking.) What's
the point of trying to find legal subtleties in these statements?
What troubles me is not so much that numerous messages are being devoted
to debating a pseudo-issue. Rather, it is the flagrantly partisan nature of
the debate, with Kerry supporters attributing a nonsensical position on the
527s to Bush and Bush supporters attributing a sensible position to him. No
one is going to get Kerry or Bush elected by means of messages posted to
this list. I suppose no great harm is done when the list becomes a forum
for heated partisan debate. But it seems to me the list is of greater
benefit if it is an arena in which posters try to leave their partisanship
at the door and look at questions from the standpoint of what the law is and
what it ought to be for the sake of the system as a whole. I don't at all
say it is illegitimate to bring partisan considerations into one's positions
on election law issues, but I thnk this list will serve its members and the
profession better if we keep those considerations muted.
Best,
Daniel Lowenstein
UCLA Law School
405 Hilgard
Los Angeles, California 90095-1476
310-825-5148
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu
[mailto:owner-election-law_gl@majordomo.lls.edu] On Behalf Of Marty Lederman
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 5:09 PM
To: Kelner, Robert; election-law@majordomo.lls.edu
Subject: Re: Bush on 527s
I do think that transcript is very revealing, but perhaps not in the way
that Robert Kelner suggests. ("Q Do you -- when you say that you want to
stop all -- THE PRESIDENT: All of them. Q Does that mean -- THE
PRESIDENT: That means that ad, every other ad. Q Would you encourage
Republicans not to give to -- THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely. I don't think we
ought to have 527s. I can't be more plain about it.")
Better still is today's McClellan press gaggle,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/08/20040826-3.html, which
includes the following:
Mr. McCLELLAN: The President condemns all the ads and activity by these
shadowy groups. This is unregulated soft money activity that the President
thought we got rid of when he signed the campaign finance reforms into law.
Senator McCain said that he thought it was a good idea for the two of them
to work together to shut down this kind of activity.
Q So this includes the Swift Boat, right? You want to shut down -- Bush
wants to shut down, through legal action --
MR. McCLELLAN: All, all the ads and activity by the shadowy groups. That
would include everything that these shadowy groups are involved in.
Q And that would include the Swift Boat, yes?
MR. McCLELLAN: That includes everything. That includes -- I don't know how I
can be more clear than that, Adam.
Q Are the Swift Boats a shadowy group?
Q But McCain said beyond that -- he called the President to condemn those
specific ads. Will he condemn those --
MR. McCLELLAN: The President has condemned every ad and all the activity by
these 527 groups.
Q How does he feel about what they're saying?
MR. McCLELLAN: I don't think I can be more clear, nor can the President. The
President wants Senator Kerry to join us in calling for a stop to all of the
ads and activity by these shadowy groups. The President has condemned all of
this activity by these shadowy groups.
* * * *
There's more of this sort of thing, too. Are there references to "soft
money"? Yes, there are -- but I don't see how anyone reading this could
possibly think anything other than that the President wants to "shut down"
527s' advertisements, and 527s themselves. I doubt that one listener in
100, or 1000, understands that "soft money" here means individual
contributions to the 527 of over $5000, or that that is the focus of Bush's
concern. (Once again, if the President's only complaint were truly that the
groups accept contributions of more than $5000, that would be completely
unresponsive to the outrage about the Swift Boat ads -- and therefore the
White House's story is not remotely limited to, and does not even mention,
the $5000 cap.)
Obviously, the adjective of the day is "shadowy," which McClellan used ten
times in an eight-minute press briefing. The implication, presumably, is
that the problem with these ads is that we don't know who is paying for
them. (Note Bush's statement on 8/23: "I thought we were going to, once
and for all, get rid of a system where people could just pour tons of money
in and not be held to account for the advertising.") As far as I know, this
is no longer a real issue: Even if a 527 is not deemed a political
committee by FECA, its receipts are subject to disclosure under the IRS
rules. Thus, for example, we know exactly who has funded the Swift Boats
ads; and we know exactly who is funding Move On's ads. (I concede that I am
not sufficiently conversant with the disclosure rules. If this is not
correct, I welcome clarification.)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kelner, Robert" < rkelner@cov.com>
To: < election-law@majordomo.lls.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 26, 2004 2:40 PM
Subject: Fw: Bush on 527s Transcript (August 23)
Here is the full context of the statement by President Bush yesterday,
part of which Marty quoted. If you read it straight through, including the Q
and A that preceded the part Marty quoted, I believe it is clear the
President was addressing the use of soft money. He associated 527s with soft
money, as do most of the media. But you be the judge.
--------------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: Flahive, Laura < lflahive@cov.com>
To: Kelner, Robert < rkelner@cov.com>
Sent: Thu Aug 26 14:32:03 2004
Subject: Bush on 527s Transcript (August 23)
To: National Desk
Contact: White House Press Office, 202-456-2580
WASHINGTON, Aug. 23 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Following is a transcript of
remarks by President Bush in a press availability today:
Prairie Chapel Ranch
Crawford, Texas
12:05 P.M. CDT
THE PRESIDENT: Mr. Secretary, thank you for coming. General Myers, Vice
President and Condi and I had a long-ranging discussion with our key members
of the defense team about a variety of subjects. We talked about Iraq, the
way forward in Iraq, the way to help the Iraqis get to elections. We're
making progress on the ground. We were briefed not only by the Secretary and
General Myers, but, as well, by General Casey and General Abizaid via secure
communications.
We talked about transformation issues. We spent some time talking about
the reconfiguration of our forces around the world, to better be able to
keep the peace. And, Mr. Secretary, I thank you for your leadership on that
issues. The Secretary did a great job of not only coming up with a strategy
to enable America to better protect ourselves and friends and allies against
the true threats of the 21st century, but he consulted with our allies in
such a way that the response was very positive and I thought very good.
We talked about intelligence reform. We just talked about a variety of
issues that are important for the security of the country. And I appreciate
you coming, sir. Thank you for being here.
I'll answer some questions. Deb.
Q Some of your supporters are refighting the Vietnam War with their
comments about Kerry's war record. Do you think that these attacks of this
nature are unpatriotic, un-American, seeing as we're sending young people to
war at this time?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I think we ought to be debating who best to be leading
this country in the war against terror. And that's what I'll continue to try
to convince the American people of, is that I'm the right person to continue
to lead the country in the war on terror. I think we ought to be looking
forward, not backward. And that's the kind of campaign I'll continue to run.
Q But why won't you denounce the charges that your supporters are making
against Kerry?
THE PRESIDENT: I'm denouncing all the stuff being on TV of the 527s.
That's what I've said. I said this kind of unregulated soft money is wrong
for the process. And I asked Senator Kerry to join me in getting rid of all
that kind of soft money, not only on TV, but used for other purposes, as
well. I, frankly, thought we'd gotten rid of that when I signed the
McCain-Feingold bill. I thought we were going to, once and for all, get rid
of a system where people could just pour tons of money in and not be held to
account for the advertising. And so I'm disappointed with all those kinds of
ads.
Yes, Adam.
Q Thank you, Mr. President. This doesn't have anything to do with other
527 ads. You've been accused of mounting a smear campaign. Do you think
Senator Kerry lied about his war record?
THE PRESIDENT: I think Senator Kerry served admirably, and he ought to be
-- he ought to be proud of his record. But the question is, who best to lead
the country in the war on terror; who can handle the responsibilities of the
Commander-in-Chief; who's got a clear vision of the risks that the country
faces.
Yes.
Q Mr. President, some Republicans, such as Bob Dole and some Republican
donors such as --
THE PRESIDENT: What paper are you with?
Q I'm with Bloomberg.
THE PRESIDENT: Okay, good. First time I've seen you ought here. Welcome.
Q Thank you.
THE PRESIDENT: No problem. Did you write the story about the Vice
President? (Laughter.) Yes, go ahead.
Q That's okay. Some Republicans such as Bob Dole and some Republican
donors such as Bob Perry have contributed and endorsed the message of these
527 Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads --
THE PRESIDENT: Right.
Q Do you -- when you say that you want to stop all --
THE PRESIDENT: All of them.
Q Does that mean --
THE PRESIDENT: That means that ad, every other ad.
Q Would you encourage Republicans not to give to --
THE PRESIDENT: Absolutely. I don't think we ought to have 527s. I can't be
more plain about it. And I wish -- I hope my opponent joins me in saying,
condemning these activities of the 527s. It's the -- I think they're bad for
the system. That's why I signed the bill, McCain-Feingold. I've been
disappointed that for the first six months of this year, 527s were just
pouring tons of money, billionaires writing checks. And I spoke out against
them early. I tried to get others to speak out against them, as well. And I
just don't -- I think they're bad for the system.
Yes, Robert.
Q Sir, on the price of oil, it's at or near record levels. Other than
pushing for your energy proposals, which we know about, what else are you
doing to try to mitigate the price of oil?
THE PRESIDENT: That's the best thing, is to come up with a comprehensive
energy strategy that encourages conservation, encourages environmentally
sensitive exploration for natural resources in our own hemisphere. It talks
about, of course, dealing with new forms of energy. And, admittedly, those
aren't going to come on market in time to deal with the current price of oil
--
Q Did you talk to President Putin about it this morning?
THE PRESIDENT: Yes, I talked to him about it.
Q What did he say?
THE PRESIDENT: He said he recognizes that we don't need to be -- he
doesn't need to be causing conditions such that it hurts consuming nations.
He's wise about that. But we've got a lot of countries beginning to use more
energy, and we haven't done a good job of increasing supply.
Q Just one more thing along that line. Are you concerned that the price of
energy could become a campaign issue here of larger proportions than it
already is?
THE PRESIDENT: I think the people know that we have -- this administration
has been asking for Congress to pass a comprehensive energy plan for over
two years. We recognized this problem two years ago and spoke out clearly
and urged the members of Congress to pass a bill. And it's stuck. So people
know we've been proactive on the issue.
Last question. Yes. Hold on. Yes, Mark.
Q Thank you. Sir, how is work coming --
THE PRESIDENT: You've got your earphones on so you're speaking very
loudly. (Laughter.)
Q Sorry, didn't mean to do that. How is work coming on your convention
speech? What should we expect from it? And are you worried about violent
protests at the convention?
THE PRESIDENT: Let's see. You know, I -- people are allowed to express
themselves in democracies, and hopefully they'll do so in a peaceful way.
In terms of the speech, I'm working on it. But I don't want to give you
any tidbits --
Q Just a little bit.
THE PRESIDENT: I don't want to give you any tidbits, for fear that you may
not pay attention when I actually stand up there and deliver it. (Laughter.)
Q Oh, he'll pay attention.
THE PRESIDENT: You think he will? (Laughter.) I'm looking forward to
giving it. I want to talk about what I intend to do. We've got a great
record, when you think about it -- led the world and the war on terror; the
world is safer as a result of the actions we've taken; Afghanistan is no
longer run by the Taliban; Saddam Hussein sits in a prison cell; Muammar
Qaddafi has gotten rid of his weapons; Pakistan is an ally in the war on
terror. There's more work to be done in fighting off these terrorists. I
clearly see that. I understand that we've got to use all resources at our
disposal to find and bring these people to justice.
When you think about domestic politics, we've faced a recession, had tax
cuts that encouraged economic growth and vitality. We've helped reform a
education system with the No Child Left Behind Act. We've reformed Medicare,
first administration ever to get Congress to move forward on Medicare
reform. We got trade promotion authority; it opened up more markets for U.S.
entrepreneurs and farmers and manufacturers.
We've had a great record. But the only reason to even talk about the
record is to say, give us a chance to move the country forward. We're people
who can get the job done. We've proven to you we can get the job done, and
there's more work to be done. And I'll talk about that in the convention. In
other words, it's going to be a forward-looking speech.
Last question. I know you all are hungry.
Q Absolutely. Mr. President, thank you. Intelligence Committee Chairman
Pat Roberts has proposed a bill to radically restructure the intelligence
community. He splits up the CIA, gives complete budgetary authority to the
new NID, as well as personnel hiring and firing authority, and more -- takes
a number of intelligence collection agencies out of the Pentagon and
transmits them over to the NID. I wonder what you think of that proposal,
and what is the status of the White House effort on this front.
THE PRESIDENT: I haven't seen it. I haven't seen his proposal. He was on
TV yesterday morning talking about his ideas, and I'm sure he's going to
send it over to us to take a look at it.
There is a lot of ideas moving around. And we've got a lot of smart people
looking at the best way to fashion intelligence so that the President and
his Cabinet Secretaries have got the ability to make good judgment calls on
behalf of the American people. That's what I'm interested in. I'm interested
in how to get the best intelligence to my desk so I can be a good decision-
maker on behalf of the people of this country. And intelligence is a vital
part of winning this war against these terrorists. We've got to know who
they are, what they're thinking, where they are. And so that's how we're
approaching this issue.
Now, listen, I've called for a national intelligence director because I
think it's an important part of coordinating activities to make sure the
analysis of information is as good as it can possibly be. I am not for
anything standing in between me and my line operators like the Secretary of
Defense. In other words, once intelligence is in place, and once we come up
with a decision as to how to act, I want to make sure the person responsible
for the actions is -- has a direct report to me.
And so we're looking at all options including the budget option, all aimed
at making sure that me and future Presidents have got the best information
possible. And so Senator Roberts is a good, thoughtful guy, he came up with
an idea and we'll look at it. We'll take a look at it and determine whether
or not it works or not. But there's going to be a lot of other ideas, too,
as this debate goes forward.
Listen, thank you all.
Q You're not going to Athens this week, are you?
THE PRESIDENT: Athens, Texas? (Laughter.)
Q The Olympics, Greece.
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, the Olympics. No, I'm not.
Q Have you been watching them?
THE PRESIDENT: Oh, yes. Yes, it's been exciting.
Q Any particular moment stand out?
THE PRESIDENT: Particular moment? I like the -- let's see -- Iraqi soccer.
I liked seeing the Afghan woman carrying the flag, coming in. I loved our
gymnasts. I've been watching the swimming. I've seen a lot, yes.
Listen, thank you all. Enjoy yourself.
END 12:18 P.M. CDT
http://www.usnewswire.com/
-0-
/© 2004 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/
____________________________
Laura M. Flahive
Legal Assistant
Covington & Burling
Washington, DC
Tel: 202.662.5005
lflahive@cov.com
This message is from a law firm and may contain information that is
confidential or legally privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
please immediately advise the sender by reply e-mail that this message has
been inadvertently transmitted to you and delete this e-mail from your
system.
Thank you for your cooperation.