Democracy 21 Joins With Campaign Legal Center in Challenging Effort by 501(c)(4) Group to Obtain FEC Approval to Evade Law
Democracy 21 joined The Campaign Legal Center today in filing comments at the FEC opposing an attempt by American Future Fund (AFF), a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) group, to get approval to use federal candidates and their committees to solicit unlimited contributions through joint fundraising efforts with the section 501(c)(4) group, and with super PACs and related entities.
Federal candidates and officeholders and their committees are prohibited by federal campaign finance laws from raising unlimited, or soft money, contributions.
In Advisory Opinion Request 2012-19 (AOR), AFF asked the FEC whether it may engage in joint fundraising efforts to raise unlimited contributions with the authorized campaign committees of federal candidates and with other political entities. Such joint fundraising with federal candidate committees would violate federal law.
This is just the latest attempt by AFF to gain FEC approval for efforts to evade existing campaign finance laws.
According to Democracy 21 president Fred Wertheimer:
American Future Fund appears to be in the business of trying to get FEC approval to evade the campaign finance laws. AFF’s request would put federal officeholders and candidates back in the business of soliciting unlimited contributions. Congress and the Supreme Court clearly recognized the dangers of corruption inherent in allowing officeholders to solicit unlimited contributions from influence-seeking donors. Congress banned the practice of federal officeholders and candidates soliciting contributions that did not comply with federal contribution limits and the Supreme Court upheld the ban. The FEC should flatly reject the AFF Advisory Opinion request to allow federal officeholders and candidates to raise such funds.
In June, in response to another AOR filed by AFF, the FEC deadlocked, 3 to 3, on 5 of 8 advertisements the group proposed to run without filing the electioneering communications and donor disclosure information required by the campaign finance disclosure laws. Democracy 21 joined the Campaign Legal Center in filing comments arguing that AFF ads using recordings of President Obama’s voice and the phrases “the White House” and “the Administration,” referred to a “clearly identified candidate” and therefore constituted “electioneering communications” under the campaign finance laws. Our comments noted that this meant the ads were subject to disclosure laws covering “electioneering communications” and requiring the group to reveal its donors.
