Is this woman the new Lois Lerner?

As some at the Federal Election Commission seek to broaden the power of the agency, critics are arguing that it's beginning to look increasingly like the Internal Revenue Service under Lois Lerner, who has been accused of using her office for partisan purposes.

They take special aim at the commission's Democratic chairwoman, Ann Ravel, who also served as chairwoman of California's equivalent to the FEC, the Fair Political Practices Commission, before coming to Washington in 2013. Ravel has lambasted the commission as "dysfunctional" because votes on enforcement issues have often resulted in ties, and she has said the commission should go beyond its role of enforcing election laws by doing more to get women and minorities elected to political office. She has complained that super PACs are "95 percent run by white men," and that as a result, "the people who get the money are generally also white men."

To remedy those problems, Ravel sponsored a forum at the FEC in June to talk about getting more women involved in the political process. She has also proposed broadening disclosure laws to diminish the role of outside spending, and suggested that the FEC should claim authority to regulate political content on the Web. She's also voiced support for eliminating one member of the commission in order to create a partisan majority that doesn't have tie votes, saying in an interview with Roll Call, "I think it would help."

Hans von Spakovsky, who served on the FEC from 2006-2008, takes issue with Ravel's effort to go beyond the traditional purview of the commission's functions. "The FEC has one duty, and one duty only — to enforce the existing campaign finance laws. It has no business trying to 'encourage' or 'discourage' folks to get involved in politics, no matter who they are, minority or otherwise," Spakovsky told theWashington Examiner.

Spakovsky also said it would be contrary to the function of the FEC to limit the number of commissioners. "The fact that any action by the FEC requires the votes of four commissioners, and thus bipartisan agreement, ensures that its investigations are based on enforcing the law evenly, without regard to the party a particular candidate is a member of. Ravel wants to end that, which would allow the FEC to be used for partisan political witch hunts," Spakovsky said.

Ravel did not respond to a request for comment.

The votes on which the commission ties often pertain to alleged violations by the third-party groups known as super political action committees. Super PACs have no contribution limit and no spending limit as long as they do not "coordinate" with the candidates for whom they are spending. The FEC defines this as "payment made in cooperation with, at the suggestion of, or per an understanding with a candidate." Critics of those groups say they often circumvent the law by straddling the definition of coordination.

Ravel co-signed a letter with fellow Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub in June, saying the spending that those groups engage in on behalf of candidates should count toward the spending limit for those candidates. "There is this basic notion that super PACs are supposed to be separate from the candidates," Weintraub has said. "[Voters] look at what's going on, and they say: 'This doesn't look separate. Where are the lines?'"

The Wall Street Journal's editorial board has compared Ravel to the IRS' Lerner, who's also been accused of using her office to push a political agenda. "We'll take our chances with donations freely given than with the arbitrary and partisan rulings of Lois Lerner at the IRS or Ann Ravel at the Federal Election Commission," the editorial board wrote.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading.....

[VIDEO] It's back: FEC says regulating Internet, Google, Facebook under its 'purview'

After backing down amid concerns she wanted to regulate political speech, and even new sites like the Drudge Report, the chairwoman of the Federal Election Commission has renewed talk about targeting campaign and political activities on the internet.

Ann M. Ravel, discussing election regulation during a speech in New York, suggested it was time to produce "thoughtful policy" targeting internet political activity. She also expressed frustration that her last bid was met with "threatening misogynist responses to me."

She was speaking at a day-long conference hosted by the Brennan Center for Justice, the New York City Campaign Finance Board, and the Committee for Economic Development when she was asked about regulating the internet, Google and Facebook.

Ravel said that it would be under the "purview" of the FEC to oversee internet political activities such as fundraising and donations.

Her speech was just posted on YouTube.

Under current rules, the FEC regulates paid campaign ads on the internet just like they do on TV. However, videos or other social media posted for free are not regulated.

When the Democrats on the FEC first raised the possibility of regulations, opponents feared they were going to target conservative groups, activities and news sites. A proposal to delve into the issue died in a 3-3 vote.

Republican Commissioner Lee E. Goodman, the previous chairman,warned that regulations would silence voices on the internet and that sites with a political bent, even in the media, could face rules requiring them to disclose donors and finances.

But in answering the question this week, Ravel indicated she wants to pursue regulations. "It would be under the purview of the FEC to look at some of the issues that arise in new media and the impact of new media, in particular with respect to disclosure and ensuring that there is no corporate contributions, for example excessive contributions or contributions to a particular candidates for example," she said.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading....

2016 Presidential Candidates Raise Millions from Key States

Andrea Izzotti/Shutterstock

July 17, 2015 -- The reports are in. On July 15, the 2016 presidential candidates turned in their Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings disclosing how much their campaign committees have raised to date. California, New York, Florida, and Texas dominate the list of states from which candidates have received money for their campaigns.

The total cost of the 2016 presidential election is expected to reach an unprecedented $5 billion, with outside groups, like single-candidate super PACs, accounting for an increasingly larger portion of expenditures. Filings for outside groups are due to the FEC on July 31.

Data: MapLight analysis of campaign contributions to the principal campaign committees of federal presidential candidates for the 2016 election cycle, from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015. Data Source: Federal Election Commission.

Methodology: MapLight analysis of campaign contributions to the principal campaign committees of federal presidential candidates for the 2016 election cycle, from January 1, 2015 to June 30, 2015. Total raised figures are based on candidates summaries compiled by the Federal Election Commission. State breakdowns for donors are based on itemized records of individual and candidate contributions. All numbers are based on latest data made available by the Federal Election Commission as of July 16, 2015.

MapLight is a 501c(3) organization that tracks money's influence on politics.

Via: Map Light

Continue Reading....

With new documents, stench of IRS scandal reaches into its third year

In 2013, Lois Lerner, former head of the IRS non-profit section, pleaded the Fifth Amendment before the House Oversight Committee. She had been called to testify about her division's unjustifiable harassment of conservative applicants for nonprofit status.

Just over a year later, it was reported that a number of Lerner's work emails had gone missing due to a supposed problem with her hard drive. Then last month, the Treasury inspector general for tax administration testified that IRS employees — despite being under explicit orders not to destroy records — had "magnetically erased" as many as 24,000 of Lerner's missing emails from hundreds of data tapes where they were being stored.

Whether the emails' disappearance was innocent or not, the public is only now beginning to get more information about just what it concealed, thanks to an ongoing Freedom of Information Act lawsuit against the IRS by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch. Documents unearthed this week show that in Fall 2010, Lerner was working to get the Justice Department to prosecute nonprofits that engaged in political activity. This despite the fact that 501(c)4 groups, which cannot take tax-deductible donations, are permitted to engage in some political advocacy by law and by Civil Rights-era court precedents.

One newly uncovered memo describes an October 2010 meeting between Lerner, an FBI official and senior officials at the Justice Department criminal division that investigates public corruption cases. According to this memo, Lerner attempted to get them to go after groups that Lerner described as "political committees 'posing' as if they are not subject to FEC law."

The newly unearthed emails also confirm that around the same time, the IRS shared as many as 1.25 million pages of confidential tax documents with the Justice Department — an apparent violation of strict federal tax privacy laws. Those million-plus pages, according to an email contained among the new documents, were 113,000 tax filings for 501(c)4 organizations from 2007 until October 2010.

The original IRS scandal hinted at an intensive but narrow effort within one division to punish or at least make life difficult for the Obama administration's political opponents — the sort of thing that could perhaps be chalked up to a few bad actors. But the new documents suggest there were at least attempts to bring other agencies in on the wrongdoing.

Incidentally, the new documents also show how later, in July 2013, Obama Justice Department officials requested access to documents before they were handed over to Congress as part of the investigation into this IRS wrongdoing.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading....

Emails: Obama Administration Discussed Prosecuting Nonprofit Orgs

Newly released documents show Department of Justice officials, Internal Revenue Service and Federal Bureau of Investigation officials were discussing prosecuting nonprofit organizations for allegedly engaging in illegal political activity.

An official “DOJ Recap” document obtained by the group Judicial Watch details an Oct. 8, 2010 meeting between DOJ, IRS and FBI officials, including Lois Lerner, where the administration employees discussed “several possible theories to bring criminal charges under FEC law” against groups “posing” as tax exempt nonprofits.

“The section’s attorneys expressed concern that certain section 501(c) organizations are actually political committees ‘posing’ as if they are not subject to FEC law, and therefore may be subject to criminal liability,” reads the memo from IRS Exempt Organizations Tax Law Specialist Siri Buller to top IRS officials.

Lerner, who was forced out of the IRS in 2013 amid a scandal that the IRS was targeting conservative groups, and her top aide Judy Kindell, explained to DOJ and FBI officials that “although we do not believe that organizations which are subject to a civil audit subsequently receive any type of immunity from a criminal investigation, she will refer them to individuals from [Criminal Investigations] who can better answer that question.”

“[Lerner] explained that we are legally required to separate the civil and criminal aspects of any examination and that while we do not have EO law experts in CI, our FIU agents are experienced in coordinating with CI,” according to the memo. “The attorneys asked whether a change in the law is necessary, and whether a three-way partnership among DOJ, the FEC, and the IRS is possible to prevent prohibited activity by these organizations.”

Judicial Watch says another document shows that just prior to the October 2010 meeting the IRS began giving the FBI confidential taxpayer information on nonprofits. The document obtained by Judicial Watch says the IRS gave the FBI some 21 disks with 1.25 million pages of taxpayer records.

“These new documents show that the Obama IRS scandal is also an Obama DOJ and FBI scandal,” Judicial Watch president Tom Fitton said in a statement. “The FBI and Justice Department worked with Lois Lerner and the IRS to concoct some reason to put President Obama’s opponents in jail before his reelection. And this abuse resulted in the FBI’s illegally obtaining confidential taxpayer information. How can the Justice Department and FBI investigate the very scandal in which they are implicated?”

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading....

Trump Surges in Popularity in N.H., Taking Second Place in Suffolk Poll

He’s dismissed by the political professionals, but there is no denying that the appetite for Donald Trump among Republican primary voters is real.

The New York developer and reality television star is second among 2016 presidential candidates in a new Suffolk University poll of New Hampshire Republicans – behind only former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.

The poll of 500 likely GOP presidential primary voters found 14% back Mr. Bush. Mr. Trump is right behind at 11%. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio come next, with 8% and 7%, respectively. The poll tested 19 GOP candidates – a rare survey that included ultra-longshots like Mark Everson and former Govs. Bob Ehrlich and Jim Gilmore.

While Mr. Trump is experiencing a bump in popularity after announcing the launch of his campaign last week (he filed formal Federal Elections Commission paperwork Monday), he remains the most disliked GOP candidate in the field. Suffolk found he is the only GOP candidate with a net unfavorable rating in New Hampshire — 37% of those surveyed had a favorable opinion of Mr. Trump, compared to 49% who had an unfavorable view.

The candidate with the largest gap between favorable and unfavorable ratings is Mr. Rubio, at 61% favorable to 14% unfavorable. Mr. Rubio was also chosen as the second choice by 13% of poll respondents. Mr. Bush was the second-choice pick of 14% of those surveyed.

The poll of 500 likely New Hampshire Republican presidential primary voters was conducted from June 18, the day after Mr. Trump announced his campaign, through June 22. It has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

Via: Wall Street Journal

Continue Reading....

Public outcry forces FEC Democrats to junk bid to regulate Internet, Drudge

The Federal Election Commission, facing punishing criticism for suggesting that political activity on the Internet should be regulated, rejected talk of new rules Thursday, a victory for GOP commissioners who feared Democrats were targeting conservative sites, even the Drudge Report.

During a public meeting, Democrats on the FEC said they were responding to the public outcry in saying that no new rules are required.

RELATED: Charge: Election commission Dems want to regulate conservative Internet, super PACs

Democratic Commissioner Ellen Weintraub said the FEC received 5,000 comments demanding the agency keep their hands off the Internet. In response, she proposed a resolution that directly barred Internet regulation.

"I wanted to make clear that I was listening to what people are saying out there and I think we should allay those concerns if people are concerned that we are about to do that," she said. Her resolution said: "I further move that the Commission direct [counsel] to exclude from the rulemaking any proposal affecting political activity on the Internet."

RELATED: Head of 'non-partisan' FEC backs Hillary Clinton's push for more women in politics

Republicans on the commission had raised concerns that Democrats on the commission were targeting conservative political and news websites like Drudge, and could regulate them.

Weintraub said she never sought to regulate the Internet in her bid to provide more transparency in fundraising and political activity covered by the recent Supreme Court case, McCutcheon v. FEC, where the court struck down contribution limits.

RELATED: Drudge is the nation's news homepage, top driver to Fox, NYT, Politico

In seeking public comments on the effort, she said, "Two strong messages that came in. There was a strong message that we not regulate the Internet and there was an even stronger message in terms of number of people who bother to comment, who said do something about disclosure." Overall, some 32,000 comments were received.

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading....

FEC chair warns that conservative media like Drudge Report and Sean Hannity face regulation --- like PACs

Government officials, reacting to the growing voice of conservative news outlets, especially on the internet, are angling to curtail the media's exemption from federal election laws governing political organizations, a potentially chilling intervention that the chairman of theFederal Election Commission is vowing to fight.

“I think that there are impulses in the government every day to second guess and look into the editorial decisions of conservative publishers,” warned Federal Election Commission Chairman Lee E. Goodman in an interview.

“The right has begun to break the left’s media monopoly, particularly through new media outlets like the internet, and I sense that some on the left are starting to rethink the breadth of the media exemption and internet communications,” he added.

Noting the success of sites like the Drudge Report, Goodman said that protecting conservative media, especially those on the internet, “matters to me because I see the future going to the democratization of media largely through the internet. They can compete with the big boys now, and I have seen storm clouds that the second you start to regulate them. There is at least the possibility or indeed proclivity for selective enforcement, so we need to keep the media free and the internet free.”

All media has long benefited from an exemption from FEC rules, thereby allowing outlets to pick favorites in elections and promote them without any limits or disclosure requirements like political action committees.

But Goodman cited several examples where the FEC has considered regulating conservative media, including Sean Hannity's radio show and Citizens United's movie division. Those efforts to lift the media exemption died in split votes at the politically evenly divided board, often with Democrats seeking regulation.

Liberals over the years have also pushed for a change in the Federal Communications Commission's "fairness doctrine" to cut of conservative voices, and retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has delighted Democrats recently with a proposed Constitutional amendment that some say could force the media to stop endorsing candidates or promoting issues.

“The picking and choosing has started to occur,” said Goodman. “There are some in this building that think we can actually regulate” media, added Goodman, a Republican whose chairmanship lasts through December. And if that occurs, he said, “then I am concerned about disparate treatment of conservative media.”

He added, “Truth be told, I want conservative media to have the same exemption as all other media.”

Via: Washington Examiner

Continue Reading....

Treasury, IRS Propose New Nonprofit Rules

Politically active tax-exempt groups, which spent tens of millions in the previous election without disclosing their donors, would face tighter restrictions under new guidelines proposed Tuesday by the Treasury Department and the IRS.

The initial guidance, outlined in a Tuesday release and slated to be published shortly in the Federal Register, spells out that “candidate-related political activity” may not be defined as promoting the social welfare. The guidance defines such activity to include messages that picture or name a candidate on the eve of an election, potentially restricting the widespread use of campaign-style ads that evade disclosure as so-called issue ads by 501(c)4 social welfare groups.

“The proposed guidance is a first critical step toward creating clear-cut definitions of political activity by tax-exempt social welfare organizations,” Mark J. Mazur, assistant treasury secretary for tax policy, said in a release. “We are committed to getting this right before issuing additional proposed guidance or final rules.”

The IRS and the Treasury Department have been under growing pressure from Capitol Hill and from activists on the left and the right over controversies involving tax-exempt groups, which have poured big money into campaigns in the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling to deregulate political spending.

An IRS scandal involving the agency’s targeting of tea party and other groups seeking tax exemption led to the ouster of several top officials and is still under investigation on Capitol Hill. At the same time, groups promoting political money restrictions have sued the agency for allegedly failing to follow its own regulations governing social welfare groups, rules that the watchdogs argue are at odds with tax statutes and have cleared the way for tens of millions of dollars in undisclosed campaign spending.

The draft guidelines released by the IRS today fail to address the key question of whether social welfare groups should be permitted to spend any money at all on political activities, said Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer. His organization has sued the IRS along with the Campaign Legal Center. Tuesday’s Treasury release invites comments on “what proportion of a 501(c)4 organization’s activities must promote the social welfare,” but does not propose a specific percentage.

Via: Roll Call

Continue Reading....