Latest Developments:
- The United States Department of Justice announced that a Glendale attorney pleaded guilty to “conspiring to make and conceal conduit and excessive campaign contributions during the U.S. presidential election in 2016 and thereafter.” He was accused of making “unlawful contributions to political committees, thereby circumventing contribution limits and causing the political committees to unwittingly submit false reports to the Federal Election Commission.” Reuters reports that the attorney was “general counsel of Allied Wallet, a credit card payment services company,” and that other “executives at Allied Wallet were also allegedly in on the campaign donation scheme.”
- The Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance announced a disposition agreement in a case in which a limited liability company made contributions to a Boston mayoral candidate by reimbursing employees for their contributions to the candidate. Massachusetts prohibits contributions from corporations, including from LLCs. The company agreed to pay a $75,000 fine for its scheme. In one instance, 20 employees each donated $1,000 on the day following receipt of $1,000 checks from the company.
In Case You Missed It:
- Postmaster General’s Contributions Scrutinized: The Associated Press reports that the Postmaster General is facing an inquiry by House Democrats into “allegations that he encouraged employees at his former business to contribute to Republican candidates and then reimbursed them in the guise of bonuses, a violation of campaign finance laws.”
- New Jersey Straw Donors Investigated: According to the New Jersey Herald, public records show that a New Jersey law firm “earned more than $16 million from 20 public entities since 2010.” At the same time, “friends and family members of a partner at [the firm] donated over $200,000 on behalf of the firm to politicians in towns all over New Jersey.” The partner allegedly “recruited the five straw donors with an unnamed co-conspirator and reimbursed them for their donations.” The New Jersey Attorney General “says the amount that traded hands was about $239,000.”
- Publicly Financed Lobbying Reviewed: Kansas is reviewing the amount of public funds that are spent on registered lobbyists. The Salina Post describes a report by the Kansas Legislative Division of Post Audit to review “public funding from state agencies, local governments or associations tied to government activities.” The report notes that the “lobbyists disclosed this universe of clients bankrolled by taxpayers paid them nearly $1.3 million in tax dollars during 2019.” The report itself concludes that it is “not possible to know the full amount of public funds spent on lobbying” and recommends that the legislature “include a penalty for lobbyists who do not file a timely public funds report with the Secretary of State.”
- Undisclosed Political Contributions: The Wisconsin Examiner reports that a complaint filed with the IRS alleges that a nonprofit organization transferred “nearly $1 million” to its related 527 independent expenditure committee but failed to disclose the transfer to the IRS on its annual Form 990 filings.The complaint states that the nonprofit “failed to report any of this political campaign activity to the IRS,” but notes that the independent expenditure committee reported to the Wisconsin Ethics Commission that it received the contributions from the nonprofit.
- Free Food a Victim of Pandemic: The Detroit News reports that lobbyist spending on food and drink for Michigan officials dropped 62% this year. Lobbyists were left with “fewer opportunities for direct access to lawmakers.” Restaurants were closed by order of the Governor from mid-March to early June.
- Additional Spending Reportedly Passes One Billion Dollars: The Washington Times reported that “political groups’ dark money” spending is set to exceed $1 billion reported to the Federal Election Commission since the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision in 2010.” Drawing on studies from Issue One, an organization focused on campaign reform, the article apparently includes some fully disclosed independent expenditures, contributions by LLCs and state contributions disclosed after elections. By that organization’s calculations, 54% of this additional money supported Democrats while 31% supported Republicans. The article illustrates how different uses of the term “dark money” clouds the debate over disclosure and limits.