Dean says McCain skirts election law with campaign loan

Spencer Collins · #1 (**permalink**) 02-25-2008, 01:53 AM

Dean says McCain skirts election law with campaign loan

(CNN) -- Democratic Party Chairman Howard Dean accused Republican presidential front-runner John McCain of trying to skirt campaign finance laws Sunday by trying to opt out of public financing for his primary campaign.

Dean told reporters McCain has already used the prospect of nearly $6 million in federal matching funds -- which he now says he won't claim -- as collateral for a January campaign loan and to obtain automatic ballot access in every state.

Dean said he was filing a complaint with the Federal Election Commission to block McCain from quitting the public financing system, which imposes a spending cap on candidates.

"The law is very, very clear," Dean said. "He cannot be let out of the matching fund program if he has already used the promise of matching funds for loan collateral, and it's already clear from his FEC report that he has used that promise."

FEC Chairman David Mason raised similar questions about the loan agreement in a letter to the McCain campaign last week. But the Arizona senator's campaign has said its existing request with the FEC was never part of the terms of the loan, merely the possibility of future payouts.

Dean says McCain skirts election law with campaign loan - CNN.com

The more things seem to change,the more they stay the same.Anyway,we will see how this plays out,these things take time!

Spencer Collins · #2 (**permalink**) 02-25-2008, 12:50 PM

Democrats Seek FEC investigation of McCain Financing

Update

WASHINGTON — The national Democratic party wants campaign finance regulators to investigate whether Sen. John McCain would violate money-in-politics laws by withdrawing from the primary election’s public finance system, filing an official complaint Monday with the Federal Election Commission.

McCain, who had been entitled to $5.8 million in federal funds for the primary, has decided to bypass the system so he can avoid spending limits between now and the GOP’s national convention in September.

FEC Chairman David Mason notified McCain last week that he can only withdraw from public financing if he answers questions about a campaign loan and obtains approval from four members of the six-member commission. Such approval is doubtful in the short term because the commission has four vacancies and cannot convene a quorum.

“John McCain poses as a reformer but seems to think reforms apply to everyone but him,” Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean said Sunday.

Democrats Seek FEC Investigation of McCain Financing - You Decide 08!

cnredd · #3 (**permalink**) 02-25-2008, 03:11 PM

Here's a report on the whole FEC issue from A to Z...slightly dizzying...

What a Tangled Web We Weave: Everything You Need to Know About John McCain and Matching Funds

Quote:

The wonderful irony of government involvement in funding political campaigns – that is, giving your tax dollars to candidates and parties to use for convention balloon drops, negative TV ads, and campaign robocalls – is that it actually increases the perception of corruption in politics and distracts from discussion of political issues. Rarely has this phenomenon been so clearly illustrated as in the current flap over whether or not Senator McCain is committed to using tax dollars – with accompanying spending limitations – prior to his formal nomination at the GOP Convention in September.

Can the Federal Election Commission force Senator McCain to take tax funds and limit his spending? If so, what does it mean for his campaign? Has his campaign broken the law? Why can’t the FEC rule on Senator McCain’s predicament? And is Senator Obama behaving ethically? If you’ve followed a few of the stories, they all seem quite confusing. But we’re going to sort things out for you. So here you have it: all you need to know about Senator McCain and federal matching funds – and then some.

It's a pretty comprehensive report...I'll add the conclusions if you'd like to bypass the specifics...

Quote:

So, what are some lessons to be learned from this little soap opera. Here are two we suggest:

1. The law is way too complex. Political activity should not be hampered by such a suppressive waive of regulation. In the past, McCain’s lawyer, Trevor Potter, has pooh-poohed such concerns, claiming that even small time, grassroots candidates had no cause to complain about the law’s complexity. But if a lawyer of his ability representing the almost certain presidential nominee of a major party can end up in such arcane disputes, what do these laws do to average citizens seeking to participate?

In this regard, it may also be worth noting that over the years both Mr. Potter and Senator McCain have abused Chairman Mason with insults, name-calling, and unfair criticism, mainly on the theory that by not doing Senator McCain’s and the “reform community’s” bidding, he was refusing to, “enforce the law.” Senator McCain, for his part, has shown a stubborn unwillingness to learn what his laws really mean, or to even inquire into the relief that is requested in the many lawsuits he has allowed to be filed in his name. Perhaps the current flap will cause the Senator to moderate his future approach, and give “reformers” such as Potter some second thoughts about complexity.

2. Tax financing of campaigns is a waste of money.

Tax financing is supposed to prevent corruption. But nobody seriously thinks that Senator McCain or Senator Obama is devising his policies to placate donors, and there are no voters who are evaluating the candidates’ integrity based on whether or not they take tax subsidies for their campaigns. “No matter,” say some reformers, “the appearance of corruption” is enough. But here, regardless of whether or not the McCain campaign is operating within the law, nobody is harmed. It is an offense not against the people, but against at most the regulatory apparatus of the state. This should no more create “an appearance of corruption” around Senator McCain than would the knowledge that he once drove at 73 miles per hour in a 65 mph zone. Since Senator McCain has played a major role in maintaining and expanding that regulatory apparatus, and shown little concern for other citizens prosecuted under these laws, it is hard to be sympathetic to his plight, but one thing this case is not about is “corruption.”

Similarly, Senator Obama’s actions in blocking von Spakovsky suddenly fall under an ethical cloud – he can be accused of using his Senate position to lock up the FEC to the detriment of his likely general election opponent. In short, the system, far from removing the “appearance of corruption,” is creating an appearance of corruption where it should not exist. In addition to the anti-corruption rationale, tax subsidies are supposed to free up the candidates from fund-raising and allow the campaign to focus on issues. Instead, for the last week the various campaign flaps have dominated campaign coverage, distracting from the discussion of issues. Finally, tax financing is supposed to promote equality, but as we see, the rules and regulations will affect different candidates differently, often increasing inequality between them, and providing a tool for candidates to attack one another.

It is hard to imagine a more wasteful government program than taxing citizens to pay for political campaigns. The system is an earmark for "good government" types that ought to go. If these two lessons can be learned, something good will have come out of this flap du jour.

Spencer Collins · #4 (**permalink**) 02-25-2008, 03:18 PM

Needlessly complex, just like most governtmetese..

I used to deal with the FCC and they are even worse! I also hope something good will have come out of this flap du jour.

independent_thinker2002 · #5 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 12:38 PM

How is McCain going to fix the economy when he is mortgaging his own campaign's future?

cnredd · #6 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by independent_thinker2002

How is McCain going to fix the economy when he is mortgaging his own campaign's future?

"Fixing the economy" doesn't come with the same absurd rules and regulations as campaign financing...

Besides, presidents don't "fix economies"...markets do...

Why would anyone believe a candidate who thinks they could fix the economy?...

independent_thinker2002 · #7 (**permalink**) 02-26-2008, 04:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cnredd

"Fixing the economy" doesn't come with the same absurd rules and regulations as campaign financing...

Besides, presidents don't "fix economies"...markets do...

Why would anyone believe a candidate who thinks they could fix the economy?...

I don't know, probably the same reasons people voted for Bush.

You know that policies have a direct effect on our economy.

The markets aren't fixing the credit bubble. They aren't fixing predetory lending. But yes, they are outsourcing our jobs.

Regardless, my point is that we can't keep expecting the the next generation to pay for today's projects. That's how we find ourselves in a credit crisis.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode