Federal Politics

Published — November 20, 2012 Updated — May 19, 2014 at 12:19 pm ET

Gridlocked election commission awaits action by Obama

Five of six FEC members on expired terms

Introduction

The nation’s enforcer of election laws was largely paralyzed during the 2012 election, despite a Supreme Court ruling that left several key money-in-politics issues open to interpretation.

With five of six Federal Election Commission members working on expired terms (one since 2007), President Barack Obama had an opportunity to remake the agency with members more inclined to enforce campaign finance rules, say reformers.

But that hasn’t happened.

The situation hasn’t done much for the agency’s reputation.

“The Federal Election Commission is itself a campaign-finance scandal,” said longtime FEC critic and campaign finance reformer Fred Wertheimer, founder and president of Democracy 21.

“None of the players in the political arena had any reason to believe that the campaign finance laws would be enforced,” Wertheimer said. “The White House needs to address it or else must bear responsibility for this campaign-finance scandal continuing.”

As both Obama and GOP rival Mitt Romney raised hundreds of millions of dollars for their campaigns, long-time allies of each man launched supposedly independent super PACs that served as attack dogs during the long slog of the election.

Former White House aides Bill Burton and Sean Sweeney created the pro-Obama super PAC Priorities USA Action, while former Romney campaign advisers Carl Forti, Charles Spies and Larry McCarthy created the Restore Our Future super PAC to boost the former Massachusetts governor’s candidacy.

Both groups raised tens of millions of dollars, often from donors who also gave the legal maximum to the campaign committee of their preferred presidential candidate. Top campaign officials even appeared at fundraising events for the super PACs, including Romney himself.

Meanwhile groups that didn’t disclose their donors — such as Crossroads GPS, which was co-founded by GOP strategist Karl Rove — reported spending at least $300 million* on political ads, according to the Center for Responsive Politics.

The activities of these new spending groups prompted numerous complaints by reform groups, alleging that FEC rules and existing laws banning coordination between campaigns and candidates — as well as those requiring disclosure of donors to outside spending groups — were being violated.

Many organizations have also sought “advisory opinions” from the FEC, seeking guidance on the contours of the new campaign finance landscape. The commission, which consists of three Republicans and three Democrats, has repeatedly deadlocked along partisan lines.

Despite a ban on outside spending groups coordinating with candidates, the commission tied 3-3 on whether the Republican super PAC American Crossroads could feature political candidates in ads with messages that were “thematically similar” to candidates’ campaign materials.

Nor could it reach consensus on whether using the phrases “the White House” or “the administration” in negative ads ahead of Election Day referred to a “clearly identified candidate for federal office,” which would have required the American Future Fund, a conservative nonprofit, to disclose information about its donors.

The three Republican members supported the conservative groups’ positions in both cases.

“If you had an FEC that was at least half-way sentient, they would have promulgated regulations that made clear the kind of coordination and links that would not be permitted,” said Meredith McGehee, policy director at the Campaign Legal Center. ”You could have had an FEC that would have stopped this ‘my super PAC’ phenomenon.”

Likewise, Melanie Sloan, the executive director of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), agrees that a functioning FEC would have led to “more enforcement of the rules” and “more disclosure of some of the donors behind the negative ads” during the 2012 elections.

Only one commissioner, Republican Chairwoman Caroline Hunter, is working on an unexpired term — though it will end April 30.

The term of Democrat Ellen Weintraub, the commission’s vice chair, expired more than five years ago, in April of 2007.

“Every day I go in and check to see if my key still works,” said Weintraub. “They can replace me at any time. I used to get nervous about it, but now it’s become a fact of my life.”

The terms of Democrat Steven Walther and Republican Don McGahn both expired in April of 2009, while the terms of Democrat Cynthia Bauerly and Republican Matthew Petersen expired in April of 2011.

The law allows the commissioners to retain their seats until replacements are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate.

Since taking office in 2009, Obama has nominated just one individual for a seat on the FEC — labor lawyer John J. Sullivan, who, in 2010, told the Center for Public Integrity that the nomination process was “broken” after his lingered for more than 15 months, prompting him to withdraw from consideration.

Conservative lawyer Steve Hoersting doesn’t see the nomination of new commissioners as a top priority for the White House.

“With Benghazi to answer for, treaties to consider and spending cuts to champion, I don’t think appointing new commissioners will be an early priority for the Obama administration, nor should it be,” he said.

Many campaign finance reformer advocates, though, are cautiously optimistic.

“Obviously, he has less to worry about from political opponents now that he’s been re-elected,” said Sloan of CREW. “I think there’s going to be [bipartisan] agreement that new FEC commissioners are warranted.”

For now, the White House isn’t saying.

The president “intends to nominate well-qualified candidates” to the FEC, according to spokesman Eric Schultz. But when pressed for specifics on timing, Schultz said he was “not going to publically speculate on future personnel decisions.”

* Correction (Nov. 26, 2012, 10:25 a.m.): This number has been adjusted to correct a calculation error by the Center for Responsive Politics.

Read more in Federal Politics

Share this article

Join the conversation

Show Comments

11
Leave a Reply

avatar
9 Comment threads
2 Thread replies
1 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
8 Comment authors
SOUTH JERSEYTed SiroisMark SullivanTom LarkinAnonymous Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Mark Sullivan
Guest
Mark Sullivan

Trump needs to conduct these activities because the entire MSM media, excluding Fox, is campaigning against him 24/7/365.

Didn’t Monica’s boyfriend’s wife and various criminal enterprises outspend Trump by almost 2-1?

CapitalistRoader
Guest
CapitalistRoader

Why wouldn’t he get an early start on fund raising? Hillary outspent him two-to-one in 2016. The Dem’s are the party of big money. The President knows this and is attempting to get a jump on it. Of course the Dem candidate will outspend him in 2020 so it’s only rational that he starts fund raising now.

George Young
Guest
George Young

Oh brother. We just 8 years of the Campaigner – in – Chief. Where was this journalistic rectal thermometer then. Just another article about 2000 words too long that merely takes another slap at Trump for something he far from initiated.

j stevenson
Guest
j stevenson

The big difference between Trump and all the rest is his refusing to accept funds from lobbyists, so they don’t have the White House access they are used to. These are the donors who buy the presidency and are as pixxed off that he won the election as are the media and the Dems. Lobbyists have never been shut out of the WH and Trump has told them he is not for sale.

jan v
Guest
jan v

all the lobbyists are running all our government agencies and all the career civil servants who know how to run the country have been fired. YOU think this is a good thing ? what a crock…

Anonymous
Guest
Anonymous

Trump needs to be impeached and tossed in prison. Then have the key thrown away so he will never be free. Then he can see how it feels not to have freedom.

Mark Sullivan
Guest
Mark Sullivan

Thank you for the usual insightful leftist low IQ Snowflake response.

barney
Guest

hes not imprisoning them hes sending them back to their country chill tf out

SOUTH JERSEY
Guest
SOUTH JERSEY

WHY DONT YOU HAVE FREEDOM?

Tom Larkin
Guest
Tom Larkin

First, something positive. I was happy to learn of empirical information in article. BUT, the article was so slanted against President Trump as to be deemed fake news (“Perhaps Trump just lied.” (Two different issues)). The article mentions that President Trump raised over $67 million, but ended 2018 with $19 million. President Trump spent over $40 million 2016 and 2017. President Trump conducted 57 political rallies. The article notes the hats and T-shirts sold, but NEVER MENTIONS THE INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF REPUBLICAN SENATORS during a mid-term election that lost the House and the number of political rallies in… Read more »

Ted Sirois
Guest
Ted Sirois

At least Trump is getting donations from willing donors. Fresh from his first election, Obama used billions of our children’s tax dollars to save thousands of union jobs in the car industry and bailed out the banks and many Wall Street businesses. This secured his source of reelection funds for his reelection four years later.

South Jersey
Guest
South Jersey

TRUMP 2020; IS AN AMAZINGLY SMART MAN! VERY ORIGINAL & CREATIVE. I AM HAPPY TO HAVE HIS AS POTUS.

SOUTH JERSEY
Guest
SOUTH JERSEY

THIS ARTICLE WAS OBVIOUSLY WRITTEN BY, A TRUMP-HATE-GROUP. THAT FEELS; IT IS NOT NORMAL TO BE SUCCESSFUL WITH YOUR OWN BRAND NAME. WHEN, IF FACT, IT IS NORMAL! >>>>> THIS IS >>> FAKE NEWS!!! <<<< ie: A PACK-OF-LIES; SPUN INTO; DEFAMATION OF CHARACTER. FOR A SINISTER-AGENDA OF; FASCIST DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST, COUP D'ETAT

David
Guest
David

Are you on some kind of drugs? Writing in caps makes me think that you are grumpy old fart or a uneducated hillbilly.