Every Friday,
the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest news concerning the corrosive
nature of money in New York State politics—and the ongoing need for public
financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll also be linking to
dispatches from around the country highlighting the national scope of this
crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Syed Zaidi.
For more stories on an ongoing basis,
follow the Twitter hashtag #moNeYpolitics and #fairelex.
CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM AND ETHICS NEWS
NEW YORK
Corporations Use Limited Liability
Companies to Skirt Campaign Contribution Limits
Limited
Liability Companies associated with luxury real estate mogul Leonard Litwin
have channeled
more than $900,000 into races for the New York State Senate
this election cycle, largely to Republicans seeking to hold on to majority
control. These LLCs have also contributed nearly $100,000 to at least 18
candidates for the State Assembly. Although the state caps political
donations to $150,000 for individuals and $5,000 for corporations, an LLC is
treated like an individual, allowing these entities to donate up to $150,000
annually. Furthermore, the process of forming an LLC is simple; any person or
business can create an LLC by mailing a short
form
to the Department of State with a $200 fee. Companies can fashion numerous
LLC’s in order to funnel donations above the legal limit for a single
corporation. According to Adam Skaggs, senior counsel at the Brennan
Center, “It’s a loophole that absolutely should be a high priority if you want
to apply meaningful limits on how much you want to donate to candidates.”
Employing LLCs to circumvent the law can also disguise the source of
contributions since LLCs are only required to provide the name of a “registered
agent”—an attorney or a firm that processes corporate registrations—rather than
the actual parent company.
Super PACs Gear Up in Long Island Swing
District
Super
PACs are becoming increasingly involved in political contests in New York. Prosperity
First is a new Super PAC in eastern Long Island that is backed by $500,000 from
Robert Mercer, CEO of the hedge fund Renaissance Technologies. It has already
run $294,000
worth of ads supporting Republican businessman Randy Altschuler in his
bid for Congress against current incumbent Democrat Tim Bishop of the 1st
Congressional District. Renaissance Technologies spent $1.05 million in 2011
and 2012 lobbying against the Dodd-Frank bill and proposals to increase the
capital gains tax on Capitol Hill. The 2010 election contest between Altschuler
and Bishop was extremely close with 600 votes out of 200,000 throwing the race
to Bishop. Consequently Super PACs could have a significant impact on House
races such as this. Similarly the Democrat-leaning House Majority Super PAC has
been active in other districts in New York targeting Republican Representatives
Chris Gibson, Michael Grimm, Nan Hayworth and Ann Marie Buerkle. House Majority
PAC has
raised $1 million for New York Congressional races thus
far, and plans to spend $6 million in the state by Election Day.
NATIONAL
Federal Courts Weigh in on Independent
Contributions and Disclosure
Federal
courts have recently issued rulings for two campaign finance related cases. In
a 2-1 ruling the Seventh U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals rejected
challenges to disclosure laws in Illinois. Illinois mandates
disclosure of campaign expenditures by campaigns, Super PACs and non-profits
alike, without any exemptions for groups that claim their “major purpose” is
not to influence elections. Judges David Hamilton and Ilana Rovner stated that
comprehensive disclosure was “especially valuable
after Citizens United,” noting that spending by outside groups in the
2012 federal elections had already reached $ 300 million. “Amidst the cacophony
of political voices--super PACs, corporations, unions, advocacy groups, and
individuals, not to mention the parties and candidates themselves—campaign
finance data can help busy voters sift through the information and make
informed political judgments." Meanwhile the Eighth U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals, sitting en banc, upheld
Minnesota’s ban on direct corporate contributions to state political campaigns citing
“significant distinctions” between unrestrained corporate “independent
expenditures”—which the Supreme Court has validated—and direct “contributions”
to campaigns, which justify greater restrictions. However the ruling struck
down a section of the Minnesota law, which required corporations or associations
with independent expenditures of $100 or more in a given year, to create and
register a “political fund” and file regular reports with the state. The court
expressed concern over requiring ongoing reporting from groups that only spend
small amounts of money in politics, but suggested that the state may accomplish
disclosure by requiring reporting only when money is actually spent.
Obama and Romney Report Heavy August
Fundraising
The
major party presidential campaigns have released
their August fundraising numbers. Obama and the Democratic
National Committee garnered $114 million in contributions in August, leading
Mitt Romney and the RNC’s haul by $3 million. The Obama campaign touted that it
had 317,000 first-time donors in August, contributing an average of $58. Overall,
98 percent of donations to Obama were for $250 or less while 94 percent of
contributions to Romney were from such small donors according to the campaigns,
although the numbers are difficult to verify independently. The Obama campaign
made much of outraising its Republican counterpart for the first time in three
months, but these figures are hardly
an advantage for Obama considering the significant buffer Super PACs and
non-profits can offer to Romney. At least 80 percent of the money
spent on TV, radio and Internet ads overtly supporting Romney came from outside
groups, compared to only 20 percent for Obama.
Sheldon Adelson is Investing $100 Million
in Romney for a $2 Billion Return
Reform
New York has frequently noted that large donors often expect returns in terms
of policy for their contributions. Casino mogul and Republican donor Sheldon
Adelson, who has stated that he will spent $100 million to help elect Governor
Romney, is likely to receive
a 2,200 percent return on his political investment under Romney’s tax plan.
Romney’s tax plan would maintain low rates on stock dividends and capital
gains, slash taxes for high income earners, and exempt corporate profits made
overseas, in sum reducing Adelson’s tax liability by $2 billion—that is billion
with a “B”! Adelson and his wife Miriam have already donated $10 million to
Romney’s Restore Our Future Super PAC, and $35 million to non-disclosing
“social welfare” organizations such as Crossroads GPS and the Young Guns
Network. A comprehensive list of Mr. and Mrs. Adelson’s donations to Super
PACs, campaign committees, and non-profits is available at Public
Campaign Action Fund. Investigations into Obama’s major supporters
reveal similar financial interests. Former Department of Energy official Steve
Spinner, who reportedly
pressured the Energy Department to approve a $535 million dollar loan to energy
firm Solyndra, has bundled $2.27
million for Obama since 2011. Meanwhile, investment funds owned
by George Kaiser, who
helped Obama raise $250,000 back in 2008, could stand to gain
$341 million in tax breaks due to Solyndra’s bankruptcy.
Congressional Campaigns Marred by Corruption
Republicans and Democrats
alike are utilizing a slew of corruption scandals involving
Congressional candidates to launch partisan attacks. The National Republican
Congressional Committee has introduced an initiative entitled “Ten Most Corrupt
Democrats” to highlight one Democratic candidate per week facing corruption
charges leading up to the election. The Democratic Congressional Campaign
Committee has already targeted three Republican Congressional Representatives
with corruption allegations on their record. Partisan bickering aside, the
problem is quite serious. A report by Citizens for Ethics
and Responsibility in Washington, has singled out ten lawmakers in D.C. for particularly
egregious ethical and legal violations. Illegal campaign fundraising, misusing
campaign funds for personal expenses, employing official resources for campaign
activities, bribery, accepting improper gifts and loans, and conflicts of
interest are on the spectrum of improper activities that these lawmakers may
have engaged in.
Koch Industries Garnered Government Subsidies and Tax Breaks
In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, Charles G. Koch, Chairman
and CEO of Koch Industries, Inc., argued that the “growing
partnership between business and government,” or corporate cronyism, is a
destructive force that distorts markets, directs resources to inefficient
sectors, drives up energy prices, and grants an unfair advantage to some
companies over others. Campaign contributions are one avenue that businesses
frequently utilize to access such favors from the government. Koch Industries
is in fact guilty of these very practices, donating generous sums to political
campaigns, Super PACs, and shadowy non-profits, as well as lobbying lawmakers,
to procure lucrative benefits. Koch Industries spent $5.3
million on lobbying federal officials just in 2012. Americans for
Prosperity, heavily bankrolled by David and Charles Koch has spent
an estimated $18.2 million, more than any group with the exception of
Crossroads GPS, to help Republicans this election cycle. The policy
implications of these donations are evident. In Kansas, the legislature
exempted the Keystone XL Pipeline from property taxes, a $50
million cost to taxpayers. The pipeline would carry petroleum from tar sand
mines owned by Koch Industries in Canada to refineries owned by the Koch
Industries in Texas. Koch Industries has also received nearly $85 million in
federal government contracts from the Department of Defense, as well as
subsidies for oil and ethanol production.
No comments:
Post a Comment