Nov 022012
 

I follow some of the undermining of democracy in the U.S. because the same strategies are sometimes used in Canada.  Hopefully this one is not possible under Canadian law.

The NY Times article is followed by an excerpt from a good commentary, (Nation of Change)  “Super PAC Shell Games Highlight Need for New Disclosure Rules”.

Note:  in the following article  PAC = Political Action Committee

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/03/us/politics/new-super-pacs-add-to-last-minute-rush-of-spending.html?_r=4&

By NICHOLAS CONFESSORE and DEREK WILLIS

In mid-October, a Republican lawyer in Washington sent paperwork overnight to the Federal Election Commission forming a new “super PAC” called Freedom Fund North America. The group did nothing for more than a week, until the last deadline passed for publicly disclosing donors before Election Day. Then it spent nearly $1 million on advertising against Democratic candidates for the Senate in North Dakota and Montana, races that could determine control of the chamber next year.

A last-minute burst of below-the-radar cash has begun flooding into the national elections, most of it financing advertising against Democrats, often in markets where television time is still cheap. But unlike the well-known outside groups that have dominated the airwaves until now, many of the new spenders did not formally exist a few weeks ago. They have generic-sounding names, rarely have Web sites and are exploiting a loophole that will keep their donors anonymous until long after the last votes are counted.

“You get used to the same old crew,” said Heidi Heitkamp, the Democratic candidate for Senate in North Dakota, referring to outside groups like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce that have already poured millions of dollars into the race on behalf of both candidates. “But then you see a group place an ad, and don’t know what their interest is, you wonder who they are. And when you do some research, you find nothing.”

One new super PAC, called the Hardworking Americans Committee, has spent a little more than $1 million since Oct. 23 on ads attacking Senator Debbie Stabenow of Michigan, a Democrat, accusing her of failing to pay property taxes. But the group reported raising no money at all through Oct. 17, the last date before Election Day by which super PACs were required to disclose contributors. Because all the group’s cash was provided afterward, none of the donors will be revealed until the next disclosure deadline — in December.

“None of our donors are ashamed about being part of the project,” said Stuart Sandler, the group’s treasurer, who served as executive director of the state Republican Party last year. It was just the way the calendar worked.”

On Wednesday, a new super PAC called Republicans for a Prosperous America purchased $1.7 million worth of advertising against President Obama. The group was formed in early September and did not file a disclosure report in October.

But on the same day it reported purchasing the ad time, the super PAC revealed that it was affiliated with an existing group called the Republican Jewish Coalition, a tax-exempt advocacy organization that has already run millions of dollars in “issue ads” against Mr. Obama. The change was reported on Wednesday by the Sunlight Foundation, a nonpartisan watchdog group that works for more transparency in campaign spending.

Matt Brooks, the Republican Jewish Coalition’s executive director, said the group — which has been heavily financed by the casino billionaire Sheldon Adelson — wanted to run more explicit campaign ads using a super PAC but set it up under a different name to avoid tipping off opponents.

“We just didn’t want to telegraph in advance our strategy and tactics,” Mr. Brooks said. The timing had nothing to do with disguising donors, he said, but was determined by the subject of the group’s new ads: Bryna Franklin, a former organizer for Democrats living in Israel, who announced in an op-ed this week that she planned to vote for a Republican presidential candidate for the first time in her life.

Mr. Brooks said of the op-ed, “We were presented with an opportunity.

“We hustled to film her in Israel and get this turned around,” he said. “The timing didn’t have anything to do with donor disclosure.”

The lawyer representing Freedom Fund North America, Michael G. Adams, also serves as treasurer to seven other super PACs that have run ads in recent weeks against Democrats running for the Senate.

Mr. Adams, who did not respond to an e-mail seeking comment, is a former deputy counsel for the Republican politician Ernie Fletcher, the former governor of Kentucky and an ally of Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the party’s leader in the Senate.

One of them, the Fund for Freedom, reported having $89,433 on hand in its final pre-election disclosure. Since then, the group has spent $670,000 on advertising to assist Linda Lingle, the Republican candidate for Senate in Hawaii.

Other super PACs are also using last-minute contributions to finance attack ads in states where they had not been active before.

A group called Patriot Majority reported having $20,045 in cash on hand on Oct. 17. Since then, it has spent more than $400,000 on ads attacking Mitt Romney. It is one of the few major late spenders to focus on Republicans.

Now or Never PAC, a group based in Missouri, reported it had $79,494 in cash when it filed its final pre-election disclosure with the F.E.C. in mid-October. In the two weeks since, the group has spent more than $5 million in five Senate races and one House race, all to benefit Republicans.

“Especially late in the game, it’s possible to game the timing of disclosures to drop a whole lot of money without having to disclose anything about its sources,” said Bill Allison, the editorial director of the Sunlight Foundation. “We’re seeing all kinds of groups popping out of the woodwork that we haven’t ever seen before, spending a lot of money, and voters have no opportunity to see who is behind those messages.”

All the super PACs will eventually be required to disclose their donors. But additional advertising has been purchased in recent weeks by tax-exempt groups making their first foray into campaign-season advertising. Such organizations are not required to disclose their donors even after the election because they claim to be engaged primarily in educational, not political, activities.

At least 37 such groups, known as 501(c) 4s after a section of the tax code that regulates them, reported political expenditures of close to $3 million since Oct. 17.
Jo Craven McGinty contributed reporting.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

http://www.nationofchange.org/super-pac-shell-games-highlight-need-new-disclosure-rules-1355398763

Super PAC Shell Games Highlight Need for New Disclosure Rules

By Stan Oklobdzija

2012-12-13

EXCERPT

. . .   Disclosure rules seek not to stifle political speech, but serve a crucial purpose in providing voters with information about candidates. As the U.S. Supreme Court wrote in its per curiam opinion during the seminal 1976 campaign finance case ofBuckley v. Valeo:

…disclosure requirements deter actual corruption and avoid the appearance of corruption by exposing large contributions and expenditures to the light of publicity. This exposure may discourage those who would use money for improper purposes either before or after the election. A public armed with information about a candidate’s most generous supporters is better able to detect any post-election special favors that may be given in return.”

The American Anti-Corruption Act, launched by United Republic’s Represent.us campaign, seeks to end the shell games played by special interest groups by mandating that anyone that spends $10,000 or more to campaign for or against any candidate file a disclosure report with the Federal Elections Commission within 24 hours. Free speech would be protected and encouraged, but the political sleight-of-hand that allows wealthy interest groups to obviate the law and subvert the democratic process would come to an end upon passage of the act. When ordinary citizens are required to sign their name and affix their address to donations of a few hundred dollars, it’s absurd to allow multi-million dollar donors to hide behind dummy corporations and innocuously named non-profits.

Sunlight is the best disinfectant for what ails our democracy. It’s time for ordinary citizens to reach out and pull back the curtains.

 Leave a Reply

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

(required)

(required)