GOP Accuses Kerry of Using Soft Money

[wicket]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=694&ncid=703&e=3&u=/ap/20040331/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_complaint

President Bush's campaign and the GOP on Wednesday accused Democrat John Kerry's campaign of illegally coordinating political ads and get-out-the-vote activities with independent groups.

The Bush campaign and RNC said they would file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) accusing Kerry and pro-Kerry groups of violating a campaign law that broadly bans the use of "soft money" — corporate, union and unlimited individual donations — to influence federal elections.

The Bush campaign and GOP say pro-Kerry groups are illegally spending soft money in the presidential race, and that Kerry's campaign is illegally coordinating that spending. The groups have contended they are operating legally.

Groups such as the MoveOn.org Voter Fund and the Media Fund, which work on behalf of Democrats but independently of the Kerry campaign, have been running ads this month criticizing Bush in several battleground states. Kerry, too, has been airing ads in key states, but on a much smaller scale.

The coordination complaint is the second the Bush campaign has filed against the groups.

----------------------------------------------------

Damn, they are getting really desperate!

[nadinbrzezinski]

1. they'll do ANYTYING

to shut up Kerry and ANY criticism

[liberalitch]

6. Their heads will explode when....

Air America is REALLY rolling!

[SemperEadem]

36. I listened to Air American last night and felt hope for the first time

in years... Was listening to David Corn--they had the audio of the complicit 'journalists' laughing at Bush's wmd joke. I want to know the name of the journalist who said to Corn something like "C'mon, Dave, it's a joke.... lighten up.." WHO IS THAT PERSON ???!!!!!

I want to see videotape of that dinner so I can see the faces of who laughed, so that they can be hounded to shame for laughing at a joke that has so much American blood unnecessarily all over it.

[NMDemDist2]

45. Video for Dinner with WMD jokes

Look at c-span.. they have video of the dinner

[papau]

26. So RNC files credible FEC 527 complaint, asks dismissal as not credible,so

it can find a right wing judge to rule that it is credible - and the FEC will go along with this?

From the ABCNote:
The Republican National Committee will file an emergency complaint with the Federal Election Commission but urge the commission to quickly dismiss the complaint. The tactic would allow the RNC to seek more immediate relief from a federal judge, who could shut down the Democratic groups. ..We spoke with a half dozen campaign finance experts yesterday -- several sympathetic to the cause of the Republicans -- and they uniformly doubted that the FEC would ever agree to dismiss a bonafide complaint so quickly.

[playahata1]

2. Pot, meet Kettle.

Won't these people ever stop? Jeez....

[sniffa]

3. i accuse

bush of using the taxpayers Loot to: campaign; create faLse 'reporters'; sick everyone and their mother on anyone who questions the emporer.

i'm sure there's more

[liberalitch]

7. Don't forget dissing Richard

clarke on our dime.

[Catfight]

4. GOP constant complaining and finger pointing getting old

I think they have many things on their plate to take care of than worry about the other neighbors back yard. The WH lawn has grown long and needs some tending to.

[swag]

5. Yet another incentive to

contribute:

http://contribute.johnkerry.com

[devinsgram]

10. Thank you,

just made my first donation. My husband and I are both on disability, but I just feel we all have to help in any way we can.

[trogdor]

8. So what was this Club for Growth stuff about?

You know, the ones where they bashed the $h1t out of Howard Dean? What was that about? Who coordinated that?

[Turbineguy]

9. DU Member accuses GOP of fucking America

in the ass!

WH responded with "Eveybody knows our views on abstinence"

[Dulcinea]

20. ROTFLMAO!!!

Thank you for this post....I laughed so hard I had tears in my eyes!

You made my day!

[readmylips]

11. Democrats accuse GOP of using OIL Money....

Give it right back to criminal GOP junta.

[blm]

12. Did the RNC complain about the Club for Growth ads?

Only the Republican serving groups are allowed to communicate with the American people.

[Lucille]

13. Coordinated? As in GOP talking points e-mailed to every journlist,

newshow, and radio screamer?

[yltlatl]

14. Hmm nobody saw this coming or anything...

When I read that the 527 committee thingy bars the committees from coordinating w/ the campaigns, I figured this would be one of the first things Bushco did. I just hope they really don't cooperate--the Rethugs will be looking to steal a lot of campaign documents this season.

[Tippy]

15. Dear MoveOn member

Are you involved in a local or national non-profit or public interest organization? As a leader or board director or member? Please read this message carefully, because your organization could be facing a serious threat.

The Republican National Committee is pressing the Federal Election Commission ("FEC") to issue new rules that would shut down groups that dare to communicate with the public in any way critical of President Bush or members of Congress. Incredibly, the FEC has just issued -- for public comment -- proposed rules that would do just that. Any kind of non-profit -- conservative, progressive, labor, religious, secular, social service, charitable, educational, civic participation, issue-oriented, large, and small -- could be affected by these rules.

Operatives in Washington are displaying a terrifying disregard for the values of free speech and openness which underlie our democracy. Essentially, they are willing to pay any price to stop criticism of Bush administration policy.

< http://www.moveon.org/front/ >

[CBHagman]

16. They're using our tax dollars to pay for Bush's campaign trips.

And the GOP attack dogs in Congress (and that piece of filth Zell Miller) attack Democrats on our taxpayer-funded grounds and during working hours. I'd say they can stuff their complaint up their backsides.

Oh, and let's file a complaint against them.

[David__77]

17. What about the GOP's groups?

It's not like the Democrats have a corner on the market here or something. What about "Club for Growth?"

[seasat]

18. They're using our tax dollars in proGOP ads.

The medicare ads and phoney newstory along with the PR firm promoting logging in the Sierra Nevada are two that come to mind. At least when Move On uses money it is with the choice of the individuals that donate it. I gave my money in the form of tax dollars and the Bush campaign used that for those GOP promotions.

[Cocoa]

19. Bush is a litigious fellow isn't he?

like in FL in 2000, they really played the legal hardball down there.

[apnu]

22. yet another hypocrisy

If the RNC is gonna sue Kerry... why can't the DLC sue Shrub for abusing tax dollars for campaigning? The Democratic Party has to stop laying down to stuff like this and use the exact same tools that attack us to attack the opposition. Aren't there liberal lawyers out there?

[matcom]

21. Soft Money, Hard Money, Found Money, Donated Money, Soros Money

MY Money, Heinz Money

YOUR DAMNED RIGHT BUTTFUCK! HE IS GOING TO USE ALL THE MONEY HE WANTS TO BEAT YOUR WHISTLE-ASS

now SHUT UP and SIT DOWN Monkey-Dick!

[Moderator]

23. kick

..

[DeepModem Mom]

24. WP article of today uses words "criminal conspiracy"...

to describe what the Republicans are accusing Democrats of. It also seems clear that they are trying to push this issue to the courts, where they assume they can prevail.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A40573-2004Mar31.html

[recidivist]

25. Do we all now agree McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional?

Political participation is a good thing. Supporting the candidate of your choice is a good thing. Under the First Amendment as understood until last year, individuals had an absolute right to spend their own money advocating their points of view. McCain-Feingold attached severe criminal penalties to activities that have traditionally been considered ordinary political advocacy. I am appalled that the Supreme Court upheld it, but for the time being, we're stuck with it.

Yes, the RNC's current complaints are irritations. But that is not to say that they are invalid, given the law as written. I gather from the initial reports that the RNC is alleging illegal coordination. That will be tough to define, but the Democratic 527's have been representing themselves as entirely partisan operations from day one. If McCain-Feingold is worth the paper it's written on, that means there had better not have been so much as a water cooler discussion with anyone connected to the DNC or the Kerry campaign.

Incidentally, I do not think the RNC is really trying to shut down MoveOn, the Media Fund, et. al. The RNC is bringing a test case -- an absolutely inevitable test case, regardless of who brings it and when -- testing the definition of "coordination." This is an obvious tactical move for them and there is no reason to get exercised about it. If we had a Democratic incumbent with a big warchest and Republicans trying to do an end run around contribution limits via 527's, the DNC would be bringing the case. Big deal.

The RNC probably expects, and privately hopes, to lose this case. They probably expect the courts to define "coordination" so narrowly that the door will be opened wide to independent expenditures by 527s operating as semi-official affiliates of the national Parties. The moment that happens, the RNC will jump into the game bigtime, and we're back to business as usual on soft money.

How far can this go? Pretty far. Remember: back in 1996, what Bill Clinton and the DNC were doing was very widely regarded as illegal under then-existing law. Clinton (and/or his designees from the campaign, e.g. Dick Morris) was personally raising most of the money (which was what all the White House fundraising was about), dictating in which accounts (DNC vs. Clinton-Gore) to deposit the funds, personally editing the ads, and personally directing the ad buys. The DNC's contribution was pretty much limited to cutting checks upon request. But the DNC lawyers successfully defended the proposition that this was not improper "coordination" under the law.

McCain-Feingold supposedly clarified that an "independent" advocacy effort required something more than a different letterhead and separate checking account, all run by the same people. The RNC is testing whether the changes will hold up in practice. I'm sure they are happy to be on the public relations offensive on this and let our guys pay the lawyers, but that's minor politics. The main thing to realize is that if MoveOn and The Media Fund win, McCain-Feingold will be gutted.

That's fine with me. McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional, and bad policy to boot. The fact that our erratic Supreme Court was willing last year to so casually suppress the First Amendment is alarming. Last year's test case, however, was essentially an academic exercise. Now we will see if the new law stands up to the rough and tumble of a real campaign. My betting is that it won't. And good riddance.

[rinsd]

33. I hope so...

MoveOn was stupid to support it in the first place.

[recidivist]

46. Agreed.

n/t

[rocktivity]

27. Bush doesn't want to "get in the ring" with Kerry

Bush wants to disqualify him before he even gets his gloves on. HE WANTS TO BE THE ONLY CANDIDATE--just like Saddam!

:headbang:
rocknation

[CO Liberal]

28. OK - Karl Rove Has To Stop Furnishing Talking Points to Limbaugh

Fair???

[James T. Kirk]

29. Text of FEC filing

http://www.gop.com/media/SoftMoneyComplaint.pdf

Calling campaign finance experts to pick this apart!

[recidivist]

30. Bottom line: if MoveOn, The Media Fund, etc. win, McCain-Feingold is dead.

McCain-Feingold is plainly unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court was wrong to uphold it last year. We are now going to see McCain-Feingold's restrictions on political advocacy challenged by groups across the political spectrum. My betting is that George Soros, et. al. will NOT be going to jail. That means McCain-Feingold is going to be gutted.

[wicket]

31. I'm going to have to agree with you there

n/t

[recidivist]

32. I'll bet Karl Rove and the RNC already have the soft money lined up.

The RNC's legal complaint is setting up a Republican soft money breakout down the road. Bushco doesn't want to be accused of violating, evading, or undermining campaign finance reform, so they are holding off for the moment while they go through the motions of enforcing the law.

In two or three months, after the FEC and the courts refuse to intervene, the Bush campaign will announce, with great feigned "reluctance," that it is being forced to respond in kind to the Democratic 527's. A number of small Republican 527's have already been established; they just haven't raised much money. These groups, like the Democratic 527's, are nominally independent but, in fact, totally wired into the Party establishment. The moment the Bush campaign gives the word, the money will come rolling in.

No one on the left will be able to object, because our guys did it first. What we are seeing here is the destruction of McCain-Feingold.

[demdave]

34. So MoveOn and Media Fund are in violation of McCain-Feingold?

Is that what you mean? If McCain-Feingold wins then they have violated it and the only way they are not in violation is if McCain-Feingold is found to be unconstitutional?

So is McCain-Feingold the law of the land and to be obeyed or not?

[democrat_patriot]

35. Regardless of who 'wins'

the headlines are there. "Kerry using soft money". Their damage is done.

I don't hate much and I don't hate often, but I hate these hypocrites.

[recidivist]

38. ? Do you hate soft money, politicians who use soft money, or only ...

... our opponents for having the effrontery to point it out when we get caught using soft money?

McCain-Feingold was supposed to take soft money out of federal campaigns. There is no escape clause in it that says Democratic soft money is ok, and only Republican soft money is bad. There were several of us on this board -- a minority to be sure, but more than just me -- who pointed out these problems when McCain-Feingold was being debated. Now the chickens have come home to roost.

McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court needs to reverse itself at the first opportunity.

[recidivist]

37. If McCain-Feingold means what it says, they are in violation.

Far be it from me, however, to predict the courts. Our make-it-up-as-you-go-along judges are perfectly capable of creating loopholes. The problem is, any loopholes created for MoveOn and Media Fund will be instantly exploited by the Republicans as well.

MoveOn and Media Fund have been unabashedly partisan (which is a good thing, IMHO). They are out to beat George Bush and elect John Kerry. They say so explicitly. This would seem to put them into the "electioneering" business as opposed to "independent issues advocacy." The RNC says that they should, therefore, register as political committees, follow FEC rules, and avoid any coordination with the DNC and/or the Kerry campaign.

I am not a lawyer, but my layman's understanding of McCain-Feingold is that the RNC is right about this. McCain-Feingold was supposed to get soft money out of federal elections. Any organization that intends to influence a federal election is supposed to play by FEC hard money rules. The rules are a bit different for independent issues advocacy, but MoveOn and Media Fund have been forthrightly partisan; their "issue" is beating George Bush.

Now the courts are going to have to step in and decide if the law really means what it says on its face. This is no longer an abstract debate. Specific judges are going to have to decide if they are willing to throw people in jail for the "crime" of spending their own money to advocate the election or defeat of a candidate. If I were a federal judge, I would have a hard time looking myself in the mirror after doing that, but if MoveOn and Media Fund are not strongly sanctioned, the Republicans will play the same game and we're right back to square one on campaign finance. The only difference McCain-Feingold will have made is that major donors will write their checks to semi-official proxy committees rather than the DNC or RNC.

As to your final question: Yes, McCain-Feingold is the law of the land. It is also plainly unconstitutional, and the Supreme Court was wrong to uphold it last year. People are now violating an unconstitutional law and daring the courts to enforce it. So:

What do you think should happen?

And if by mid-June, the Republicans are raising tens of millions in soft money through their own 527's -- for the sake of argument, let's say they end up outraising MoveOn by a significant margin -- would that change your opinion on the legality of 527's engaging in openly partisan advertising with soft money?

[demdave]

39. If that is what the law states and intends then the ads should stop.

We should follow the law. If the Supreme Court upheld it, it should be obeyed. How do we point a finger when the obvious hypocrisy is in our court.

As for the last question, I am not sure I understand. If Mc-F is overturned by the court then everyone is allowed to use soft money. If it is upheld then we were the only ones violating the law. If the other side can raise more money than our does not really come into play here.

[tom_paine]

40. They are exposing themselfs for th whiny crybaby (w)ussies they are

As always...afraid of a fair fight.

[demdave]

41. So you are saying all sided should start using soft money?

and just ignore the Mc-F law?

[tom_paine]

42. No, I'm saying look at the "Club for Growth"

If they put a stop to the BOTH at the same time, perhaps I'd be mollified.

But we all know there is the same chance of that as Hitler putting the Brownshirts out of business (better to just roll them into the Wehrmacht while the SS assumes their duties).

When I see the law applied equally to Moveon.org and "Club for Growth" (not to mention all of the Bushevik Propaganda surrogates that MoveOn.org is the recent counter to), then I'd be less upset.

But we all know that Selective, Uneven application of Law is a hallmark of a Totalitarian Society, be it Nazi Germany, Commie Russia, Imperial Rome, Ferd Marcos' Phillipnes, Idi Amin's Uganda or Bushevik Imperial Amerika.

Same thing. Only differnce is degree, violence, basic economic philosophy.

[recidivist]

43. I took a look. One interesting fact to be aware of is ....

... that the Club for Growth has a PAC. My guess is that their political ads are paid for by the PAC, which should operate under FEC hard dollar rules. That would be perfectly above board.

In a brief glance at their web page, I did not see any information about how "Club for Growth" itself -- as opposed to "Club for Growth PAC" -- is incorporated. My layman's guess -- emphasis on GUESS -- is that it is a 501(c)4, the rules for which are different from those for (c)3's and 527's.

This brings me to a point of agreement with you: namely, the dangers of selective enforcement of the law. One of the problems with blindingly complex regulatory schemes is that they create a plethora of arbitary distinctions as well as incredibly complicated rules that no one, including the lawyers, fully understands. This leads to all sorts of problems, including arbitary and inconsistent enforcement. A simple, consistent system is much to be preferred.

That's just one of the reasons I favor sweeping deregulation of political discourse. Let candidates and parties raise their money where they can, subject only to full and timely disclosure. Let the chips fall where they may. I am confident we can be competitive. While much has been made of George Bush's warchest, he in fact has been outraised by the several Democratic contenders combined, and the Democratic 527's are proposing to raise from $200-300 million. That ain't chump change.

We don't need to be afraid of freedom of speech and unrestricted political participation. There is plenty of money to go around. Repeal McCain-Feingold.

[tom_paine]

44. You make it sounds innocent but I'm afraid I still don't agree

Given the level to which Corporate $$$ dominate our electoral process, the issue here is Mythic Corporate Personhood and the abuses it causes which continue to swell obscenely.

You are correct that, ideally, unrestricted political "participation" would be desired, but the corruption of the political process by psychomaniuplative and propaganda mechanisms undreamed of 50 years ago (not to mention the erosion of the FCC rules preventing the rise of Party-Loyal Sub-Media, which is a cancer to a Free Nation) creates some special problems that MUST be addressed or the American Experiment cannot survive much longer.

If Bush re-steals the Imperial Throne in 2004, the chances of saving America fall under 10%, IMHO.

We must agree to disagree here.