Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We are the 99 percent

F.E.C. Can’t Curb 2016 Election Abuse, Commission Chief Says

Posted 9 years ago on May 2, 2015, 4:05 p.m. EST by OccupyWallSt
Tags: news

Spread the word... The Federal Election Commission is openly declaring they can't and won't enforce the law. This article should spark an insurrection!

(Written by Eric Lichtblau for The New York Times)

WASHINGTON — The leader of the Federal Election Commission, the agency charged with regulating the way political money is raised and spent, says she has largely given up hope of reining in abuses in the 2016 presidential campaign, which could generate a record $10 billion in spending.

“The likelihood of the laws being enforced is slim,” Ann M. Ravel, the chairwoman, said in an interview. “I never want to give up, but I’m not under any illusions. People think the F.E.C. is dysfunctional. It’s worse than dysfunctional.”

Her unusually frank assessment reflects a worsening stalemate among the agency’s six commissioners. They are perpetually locked in 3-to-3 ties along party lines on key votes because of a fundamental disagreement over the mandate of the commission, which was created 40 years ago in response to the political corruption of Watergate.

Some commissioners are barely on speaking terms, cross-aisle negotiations are infrequent, and with no consensus on which rules to enforce, the caseload against violators has plummeted.

The F.E.C.’s paralysis comes at a particularly critical time because of the sea change brought about by the Supreme Court’s decision in 2010 in the Citizens United case, which freed corporations and unions to spend unlimited funds in support of political candidates. Billionaire donors and “super PACs” are already gaining an outsize role in the 2016 campaign, and the lines have become increasingly stretched and blurred over what presidential candidates and political groups are allowed to do.

Watchdog groups have gone to the F.E.C. with complaints that probable presidential candidates like Jeb Bush and Martin O’Malley are skirting finance laws by raising millions without officially declaring that they are considering running.

Ms. Ravel, who led California’s state ethics panel before her appointment as a Democratic member of the commission in 2013, said that when she became chairwoman in December, she was determined to “bridge the partisan gap” and see that the F.E.C. confronted such problems. But after five months, she said she had essentially abandoned efforts to work out agreements on what she saw as much-needed enforcement measures.

Now, she said, she plans on concentrating on getting information out publicly, rather than continuing what she sees as a futile attempt to take action against major violations. She said she was resigned to the fact that “there is not going to be any real enforcement” in the coming election.

“The few rules that are left, people feel free to ignore,” said Ellen L. Weintraub, a Democratic commissioner.

Republican members of the commission see no such crisis. They say they are comfortable with how things are working under the structure that gives each party three votes. No action at all, they say, is better than overly aggressive steps that could chill political speech.

“Congress set this place up to gridlock,” Lee E. Goodman, a Republican commissioner, said in an interview. “This agency is functioning as Congress intended. The democracy isn’t collapsing around us.”

Experts predict that the 2016 race could produce a record fund-raising haul of as much as $10 billion, with the growth fueled by well-financed outside groups. On their own, the conservative billionaires Charles G. and David H. Koch have promised to spend $889 million through their political network.

With the rise of the super PACs and the loosening of legal restrictions on corporate spending, campaigns and groups are turning to creative new methods of raising money. Writing in March in The Washington Post, Ms. Ravel charged that some candidates — she did not name names — appeared to have been amassing large war chests at fund-raisers this year without acknowledging that they were at least considering a presidential run, which would trigger campaign finance limits and disclosure.

She said it was “absurd” to think that such politicians were not at least considering a White House run under federal law.

“It’s the Wild West out there in some ways,” said Kate A. Belinski, a former lawyer at the commission who now works on campaign finance at a law firm. Candidates and political groups are increasingly willing to push the limits, she said, and the F.E.C.’s inaction means that “there’s very little threat of getting caught.”

As a lawyer in Silicon Valley who went after ethics violators in California during her time there, Ms. Ravel brought to Washington both a reformer’s mentality and a tech-savvy background, and she has used Twitter and other media to try to attract young people and women to politics.

But her aggressive efforts have angered some Republicans, who charged that an F.E.C. hearing she scheduled for next week on challenges facing women in politics was not only outside the commission’s jurisdiction but a thinly veiled attempt to help the presidential bid of Hillary Rodham Clinton. Ms. Ravel called the accusations “crazy.”

Some disputes between the commissioners have gotten personal.

A disagreement over how to treat online political ads, for instance, turned tense when Ms. Ravel received anonymous online threats over charges that she was trying to “regulate” the Internet. She angrily confronted Mr. Goodman, charging that he had unfairly “fanned the flames” against her by mischaracterizing her position in an interview he did on Fox News. But Mr. Goodman said he had no regrets about challenging her position, which he saw as opening the door to greater regulation of Internet activities.

Relations between the two have been difficult ever since.

Last fall, Ms. Ravel did join Republicans on the commission — and took some criticism from the left — in a 4-to-2 decision that eased rules growing out of the Citizens United decision and a related case. But she has had little success in persuading Republicans to vote with her on enforcement measures.

She said she was particularly frustrated that Republican commissioners would not support cases against four nonprofit groups — including Crossroads GPS, founded by Karl Rove — accused of improperly using their tax-exempt status for massive and well-financed political campaigns.

A surge in this so-called “dark money” in politics — hundreds of millions of dollars raised by nonprofits, trade associations and other groups that can keep their donations secret — has alarmed campaign-finance reformers who are pushing to make such funding public.

But Mr. Goodman said the problem was exaggerated. He and other Republicans defend their decisions to block many investigations, saying Democrats have pushed cases beyond what the law allows. “We’re not interested in going after people unless the law is fairly clear, and we’re not willing to take the law beyond where it’s written,” said Caroline C. Hunter, a Republican commissioner. Democrats view the law “more broadly,” she said.

The commission has not always been so hamstrung. In 2006, it unanimously imposed major fines against high-profile groups — liberal and conservative — for breaking campaign finance laws two years earlier by misusing their tax-exempt status for political fund-raising and campaigning. The penalties put political groups on notice, and experts credited them with helping curb similar abuses in the 2008 campaign.

These days, the six commissioners hardly ever rule unanimously on major cases, or even on some of the most minor matters. Last month at an event commemorating the commission’s 40th anniversary, even the ceremony proved controversial. Democrats and Republicans skirmished over where to hold it, whom to include and even whether to serve bagels or doughnuts. In a rare compromise, they ended up serving both.

Standing in front of a montage of photos from the F.E.C.’s history, Ms. Ravel told staff members and guests that there was a “crisis” in public confidence, and she stressed the F.E.C’s mandate for “enforcing the law.” But the ranking Republican, Matthew S. Petersen, made no mention of enforcement in his remarks a few minutes later, focusing instead on defending political speech under the First Amendment.

As guests mingled, Ms. Weintraub — the commission’s longest-serving member at 12 years — lamented to a reporter that the days when the panel could work together on important issues were essentially over.

She pointed to a former Republican commissioner standing nearby — Bradley A. Smith, who left the agency in 2005 — and said she used to be able to work with commissioners like him even when they disagreed on ideology.

Laughing, Mr. Smith assumed a fighting stance and yelled at Ms. Weintraub: “Let’s go right now, you speech-hating enemy of the First Amendment!”

A few feet away, Mr. Goodman was not laughing. As Ms. Weintraub condemned the F.E.C.’s inertia, he whispered a point-by-point rebuttal to show that things were not as bad as she made them sound.

With the commission so often deadlocked, the major fines assessed by the commission dropped precipitously last year to $135,813 from $627,408 in 2013. But like most things at the F.E.C., commissioners differ over how to interpret those numbers.

Republicans say they believe the commission’s efforts to work with political groups on training and compliance have kept campaigns within the legal lines and helped to bring down fines.

The drop in fines “could easily be read as a signal that people are following the law,” said Ms. Hunter, the Republican commissioner.

Ms. Ravel scoffed at that explanation.

“What’s really going on,” she said, “is that the Republican commissioners don’t want to enforce the law, except in the most obvious cases. The rules aren’t being followed, and that’s destructive to the political process.”



Read the Rules
[-] 5 points by turbocharger (1756) 9 years ago

Incredible. An organization set up by the machine doesnt have the power to reign in the machine? Who would have thought?!!

[-] -1 points by lugano (1221) 9 years ago

Clearly Democracy is under threat - in USA, on this forum and elsewhere. Elections supervised by and under the terms of - The 0.01% clearly have their limitations but Collective Action really doesn't! And fyi see: http://wagingnonviolence.org/feature/how-swedes-and-norwegians-broke-the-power-of-the-1-percent/

[-] 2 points by jamespeterevanhoe () 9 years ago

The effort that will have to be made to make sure all Americans that are legal to vote can VOTE is a priority in everyone's neighborhood.

Organize at the neighborhood level now and get everyone ready.

As far as Jeb Bush & the Bush Family they are out right Criminals .... from Iran Contra - drug money laundering, drug cartel funds ops setup in Panama to smuggle, deal, and money launder and it is still happening today, Gulf War syndrome-denying medical care to Gulf War Vets.... to Henry Paulson CEO of Goldman-Sachs and selling out from the TOP March of 2000 destroying the TECHBOOM leveling the Economic Playing Field for Idiot Bush Buddy GW Bush....remember .March of 2000..because Paulson in 2017 will stand trial for Defrauding Investors...... to Bush & Cheney's WMDs to create another Bush War to GHW Bush Recession 1988-89-90-91 and part of 92 (S&L Fraud) and GW Bush Recession #2 for the Bush Family 2008-09-10-11-12-13-14-15.....(the largest Securities Fraud in Global History). GDP today is still too low at less than 3%....... They are simply criminals....nothing more nothing less....

When GHW Bush ran the CIA and when HE was VP and President ......HE.....broke so many laws he became a HERO to corrupt CIA ops....corrupt DEA agents....corrupt US Military Leaders and corrupt Politicians .....who calls GHW-B on his birthday and wishes him well....who well: OBAMA < leader of the Afghan Heroin into the USA by VERTOL and the DEA via O'Gara Private Jet shipping Heroin from Mexico into the USA ....check your local airport for these Operations especially in Oregon , Vermont & the Sun Valley Airport in Idaho..use an App called FLITEAWARE.......& CLINTON in 1999 signed Bush Buddy Act >> the Financial Services Modernization Act for GHW Bush which lead to the destruction of the global economy under GW Bush....also NAFTA for Bush....YES.....the CLINTONS are Bush Buddies.....going all the way back to the Summer of 1995 when Bush Buddies made a deal with the Clintons in Jackson Hole to get them from being convicted in the Whitewater Real Estate Scam.....the Republicans just dropped the entire investigation Yet others went to Prison, and One Guy actually died???? Hummmmm Geeee
Jeb is a Bush Weasel ...... Offshore Corps and Accounts in England, partnerships with a New Zealand firm that makes Cut-powder for Drug Companies..... Rayonier Corp...... the product 2 to 1 is used by illegal drug cartels as well and What about VERTOL is Jeb Bush's company BH Global Aviation (see details via google search) nothing more than an air shipping company for illegal drugs and pharmaceutical drugs that become illegal drugs...... the BUSH Family ....... criminals.......YES > but in 2017 they will be put on trial convicted and well join the Prison Population of American. Hope they like.... Pin Stripes.....or Bright Orange ....will go good with Fake Pearls....you know MAMA BUSH.

So everyone register Now

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33802) from Coon Rapids, MN 9 years ago

I wonder - with the gates thrown wide open.

Who's race will China Finance?

Will Russia finance Hillary as a thank you for the uranium deal?

Will South America finance progressives in the hopes of a legal drug market?

Is all of this really moot if the TPP is passed?

[-] 0 points by Shule (2638) 8 years ago

The only way to get a psychopathic ruling elite to change is to undermine their power; to throw monkey wrenches into their modus'. Thus elections or any form of protest that stays within the norms of the law becomes a farce. Malcom X had it right. But now who among you all have the balls......

[-] 0 points by JPB950 (2254) 9 years ago

Unfortunately this article won't "spark an insurrection". The vast majority accept the that everyone does it when it comes to trading favors and access for corporate cash. They know no one really cares to stop it. Too many people have enough to get by and won't risk it to rock the boat.