E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSS*** UPDATED AT 1:15 PM WITH COMMENT FROM PRIORITIES USA ***
A top campaign watchdog group today is calling for a Justice Department criminal investigation into Super PACs supporting President Obama and GOP front runner Mitt Romney.
Fred Wertheimer, president of Democracy 21, a group sharply critical of Super PACs, said Priorities USA Action, the Obama Super PAC, and Restore Our Future, a similar group backing Romney, are both "illegal operations" because of their close ties to the candidates they are backing.
In the wake of reports that the White House has signed off on plans to urge wealthy donors to contribute to the group, Wertheimer said he is writing a letter to the Justice Department today urging criminal probes of both groups.
"In order to believe that the Super PACs supporting President Obama and Mitt Romney are 'independent' from the presidential campaigns they are supporting, you must believe in the tooth fairy," Wertheimer said.
Bill Burton, Obama's former deputy press secretary and 2008 campaign spokesman, set up Priorities USA Action last year along with another former Obama political aide, Sean Sweeney. Burton did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Restore Our Future, which has spent millions in the GOP primary so far, was set up by former Romney aides Charlie Spies, who was Romney’s general counsel during his 2008 bid, and Carl Forti, who was Romney’s political director. Forti is also the political director for American Crossroads.
The White House plan to steer wealthy donors to give money to Priorities USA Action was disclosed in a blog posting on the Obama campaign website, saying that the move was needed to "neutralize the avalanche of special interest spending" being mounted on the GOP side to defeat President Obama.
"The stakes are too important to play by two different sets of rules," Jim Messina, Obama's campaign manager wrote.
The New York Times reported that the White House plans to dispatch top officials, including senior advisers David Plouffe and Valerie Jarrett to meet with donors. Romney himself has appeared at Restore Our Future fundraisers, something he defended on MSNBC’s The Daily Rundown, saying he’d acted within the law.
“They can help in terms of fundraising, but cannot in any way communicate a course of advertising, suggest when ads run, where they run, what's in the content of the ads,” Romney said of candidates and campaigns and whether or how much they can coordinate with Super PACs supporting them. “Those are things that are prohibited so we're being very careful in that regard.”
A top strategist who works with Democratic Super PACs told NBC News that the White House decision came after mounting worries within party circles that spending by a phalanx of GOP Super PACs could reach $1 billion by election day -- including $100 million from the conservative oil magnate Koch brothers -- drowning out the president's message
"When you see numbers like that, it starts getting a little spooky," the strategist said.
He also said most big Democratic donors have so far been gun shy of the Super PACs, because of Obama's past criticism of such groups. In the 2010 election, Obama charged that GOP groups, fueled with “special interest” money, were threatening to “hijack” democracy.
"We need some of our big birds to get off the wire," the strategist said, noting that some wealthy donors have expressed concerns that they'll be "demonized" if they give to one of the Democratic Super PACs.
So far, Priorities USA Action has had relatively little success in raising funds, reporting last week that it had collected just $4.4 million through the end of last year. A Priorities official said it had raised another $2.3 million via a 501(c)4 arm that doesn’t have to disclose donors. (The Karl Rove-Ed Gillespie-led groups American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS have a similar set up and has raised far more money.)
That $6.7 million is compared to the $30 million raised by Restore Our Future and the $51 million reported raised by American Crossroads and its non-profit, non-disclosed affiliate Crossroads GPS.
The pro-Obama group did report a handful of big checks, including $2 million from Hollywood mogul Jeffrey Katzenberg, $1 million from the SEIU labor union, $100,000 from director Steven Spielberg, and others.
While individual donors can only give $2,500 a piece to official campaign committees, the Super PACs can collect unlimited donations from individuals, corporations, and labor unions. Priorities USA Action also reported last week that $215,000 of its operating expenses were being paid by its non-profit affiliate -- called Priorities USA -- which like Crossroads GPS, does not disclose its donors.
"As much as [David] Axelrod hates to give up this part of the president's message,” the strategist said, “most voters are pretty cynical about this stuff and don't much care.”
*** UPDATE *** Priorities spokesman Bill Burton disputes the notion that Priorities is an "illegal operation."
"We of course are abiding by all appropriate rules and laws," Burton said.
Leave a Comment:
UNIONS are nothing BUT limited Liability corps! this is a ploy by demonrats to cut off money to Republicans, the UNIONS still give billions to OBAMA and his rich Arab friends and Hollywood moguls!
But if those union funds were earmarked for Romney and the GOP, they would be deemed divine in nature, pure as the wind-driven snow, and blessed of God Himself. Maybe if there was a bit different attitude shown toward unions by Republicans, you would share in those funds. You can't expect them to donate money to the very people who are trying to cut their throats.
"demonrats"??? Seriously? How can you possibly expect to be taken seriously with nonsense like that in your vocabulary? As for rich Arab friends - has Cheney vacationed on the House of Saud's private yacht again lately?
Its all about MONEY and who ever has more WINS! This is what America has come down to and its what started it in the first place. What away to end it all. America way of life is no longer real. The rich get richer and the poor get it in the back end. America the land of the rich and poor.
How about just some criminal laws making it a felony to knowingly and deliberately publish false and misleading information about a candidate by a PAC for the purpose of altering the outcome of an election. The truth is not to be feared, no matter what the source, as knowledge benefits the public. Lies, and falsehoods, repeaded incessently, and loudly enough will be believed by the Public. Level the playing field by requiring PAC to be limited to the facts, and only the facts, and the Public will arrive at the correct decision. Otherwise, he who has the most money, the loudest, most numerous voices, and the tallest podiums to distort the facts will always win. Look what Romeny has acomplished with Gingrich with attack ads.
s
We will never be able to stop money influencing Washington. But, maybe we can minimize it effect on elections if we limit the length of time allowed for electioneering. No signs, no media events, nothing relating to the selection of candidates until 6 months before the election. Then have all the state primaries at the same time.
What a convenient timing!
Super PACs for Romney, Gingrich, Santorium, etc... have been working all over the place and I did not hear one bite from this Wertheimer. But as soon as Obama decides to enter the same game, this man starts to scream and calls for criminal investigation.
I you didn' care when the others super PACs were functionning in our face, just shut up now and wait until the end of this election to voice your concerns.
I will support you then.
In the meanwhile, VOTE OBAMA - BIDEN 2012
I think what is really sad is the fact that the American public can be swayed to vote one way or the other by who or what spends the most money. Sitting President should be able to run on their record and not need a Super-pac to do their bidding.
Too true. That's why misinformation is a BIG industry these days.
I agree. Of course, I guess you are also advocating the flip side: "presidential [candidates] should be able to run on their record and not need a Super-pac to do their bidding."
All elections should be funded by the taxpayer money and each candidate allowed to spend the same amount of taxpayer-allocated money. Any third party or outside group should be banned from advertizing against, or for, any candidate. But the press should continue analyzing, reporting, and informing the public.
Well, here I go again,
Congress should be a lifetime appointment, with a confidence\no-confidence vote of the people every 4 years. If a congress person receives a no-confidence vote, they are sent packing immediately and the Governor of that state then appoints a temporary person to fill that seat until a new lifetime congress person is voted in by the people. That would eliminate all campaign money all together. No special interest groups. No PACs, nothing to do with campaign money, period. Sure, at first some congress people will be getting no-confidence votes and campaigning will insue to vote a new congress person in, but it won't take long before politicians will realize that the people of the United States of America are serious about corruption in congress and they will once again begin to represent the people. Then campaigns will be far and few between.
Any American who values the democratic principles underlying our nation should welcome this probe. Hopefully, it will lead to the complete abolition of Super PACs.
We all know Super PACs (and all such devices which facilitate class-based extraordinary influence) are anathema to democracy.
We must blame the (currently right-wing dominated) SCOTUS for this. That is yet another important reason President Obama MUST win re-election and bring balance back to the SCOTUS.
I support his decision to use Supe Pacs, only an idiot would contemplate running without it against Mitt Romney and his many corporation and super rich backers like the Koch brothers who pledged 100 million dollars already. You have to fight fair and if the Repubes what to fight dirty and so does Obama. Obama 2012.
"Activist judges" indeed... you can't tell me the conservatives who made the majority ruling on Citizens United couldn't possibly have seen this coming. Those conniving shills knew EXACTLY what they were doing. I'm amazed they didn't legalize polling fees and vote-scalping while they were at it.
What rules, I didnt see no rules.
Where were these people when the Supreme Court Judges ruled in favor of Citizens United? Why did they not question the relationship between the lawyer who brought the case and Judge Thomas and Judge Scalia? I can't understand why there was no uproar at that time.
IAN, you should be carefull what you wish for because you might get it. This decision by the "right-wing dominated SCOTUS", if reversed, as I think it should be, would also effect the progressive/liberal/socialist/democrat UNIONS.
From the Scotus Blog
sonmanvb.....
Unions have NEVER been able to contribute any more than the (sum of) allowable INDIVIDUAL CITIZEN limits within their membership. They have merely been able to collect these VOLUNTARY INDIVIDUAL contributions in the same way that the RNC has historically done.
Furthermore, individual union members could NOT EXCEED their allowable contribution by contributing THROUGH their unions and then contributing through other channels.
We (democrats) have no problem with INDIVIDUAL citizens (flesh and blood people) making LIMITED political contributions. In fact, we encourage it.
But, since any single person can create a virtually unlimited number of corporations, any notion that assigns (citizen) personhood to LEGAL constructs (i.e. corporations) promotes the idea that citizens (and, therefore, political influence) can be conjured up through legal machinations.
Corporations CANNOT vote. Do republicans propose they be allowed to do so?
In any case, democrats do not fret over whether unions will continue able to CHANNEL LIMITED INDIVIDUAL contributions. Nor do we concern ourselves with whether right-leaning organizations continue to CHANNEL the LIMITED contributions of flesh and blood citizens.
But, as you seem to agree, allowing super wealthy (individuals and corporations) to spend UNLIMITED sums to hugely and disproportionately influence our elections is a clear, present, and malignant danger to the democratic underpinnings of our nation.
Outlaw SuperPacs and make them totally illegal...We are diluting our system and allowing influence of other gov'ts! Are we Stupid?....
I would love to hear Justice Roberts' justification for allowing our system of election to be up for grabs by the highest bidder. Seriously.
I remember the ad ending in "I'm the candidate and I support this message'. That was the lead-in to Super-Pacs. Super-Pacs, are proof that our Democratic Republic is headed down the pipes. I admit it's just another piece of the problem, but what a piece. Unlimited donations, and the candidate is blameless for their actions. I thought Swift Boat was BS, but this Super-Pac problem is worse. They don't need to pay for advertisements in the South, the Republicans have it nailed already.
I find it funny that all of these demands for investigations surface while President Obama is President, but the fact is, the white man has had maintained the Super Majority control in every aspect of the political process since the U.S.A.s contitutional inceptions and I cannot highlight (at this time) certain periods of history where this took place, with the exception of "Watergate", or, "Iran/Contra; because the Vietnam and (the second) Iraq wars. Obama plays by the white man's rules, in terms of the Super Pacs and other discrepancies. Don't pretend that it's a fair critique because because Romney's name was included in this article; I hadn't heard anything about calls for an investigation when he (Romney) was pounding Gingrich these past weeks. Or maybe, these people placed a few moles inside Obama's campaign organization who could have planned some things and then leaked a report that something did not look right and decided to "speak out" now that the economy and jobs numbers were very positive this week, as reported. I'm sorry, but, didn't the Supreme Court's decision make these "Pacs" constitutional? Oh yeah, I forgot, Scalia and the right's agenda to move the clock back 60-70 years.
Obama going with Super Pacs is just a defensive tactic because it was about the be found out that he already was, including in the last election. Timing is interesting. Same day it came out he got $200,000.00 from a Mexican drug cartel family. Ah, yes defect and spin.
Just proves Obama would make a pact with the devil himself to stay in power. Ah, then who knows, we still haven't found out where all that money came from in 2008. And he claims to be for the poor people. BHAHAAHAHAHAHHAA. Only those poor in intelligence and education. They are the only ones who believe his tripe.
There is no democracy in the system any more. There is no fairness. There are only soundbites and money also known as superpacs. Personally, I think that there should be a strict dollar limit as to what can be spent on an election. There should be a media fairness clause, that says that they are not allowed to spend more time with one front runner than another.
The president should not be allowed to make any refferrals to andthing that might be construed as electability while using taxpayer funded equipment, like say the White House, Air Force One, Military Bases, and the like unless his campaign warchest pays for them completely. If he mentions the campaign on a trip overseas in Air Force One, guess what? DNC pays for it! It's like the USA is his own little superpac and he's using it to his full advantage.
NO MORE SUPERPACS!
I just find it very interesting that no one objected to the Super PACS until President Obama decided to have one. Now that the shoe is on the other foot, they are beginning to complain about it!
You aren't supposed to notice things like that, Blondie. GOPers prefer all people to be mushrooms ~ like their legions of followers.
This should be a bipartsian no brainer. There is no doubt that money is influence. Not "free speech" as the Supreme Court ruled in Citizens United. But instead, influence. And ALL Americans, Conservative and Liberal should ban together to get his ruling overturned. And in fact, should ban together to revert the Supreme Court back to the vision our Founding Fathers had for it. Look up Marbury v. Madison and the concept of "Judicial Review". Then please research how Congress can overturn a Supreme Court Decision. Briefly, if the decision is based strictly on the current court's intepretation of the Constitution, Congress cannot do anything unless a new Constitutional Amendment is introduced and ratified by the States through a Constitutional Convention. Which of course is highly unlikely.
And for those of you who use the term activist judges? The term applies to BOTH conservative and liberal justices.
How about we all sign a statement pledging to NOT vote for any candidate that has a super-PAC supporting them? These things are supposed to be independent of the candidates, but I'll bet we would that the candidates can shut them down pretty darm quick if we all signed that pledge! Independent of the candidates? Horsepucky!
Congratulations, U.S Supreme Court. Will go down in history as the worst, most damaging, and most partisan court in history. Another catastrophic result of republican rule.
"Republican rule" really? My God what an idiot. Unfortunately we've degenerated into a nation of easily led sheep who play with the politics that determine our very destiny as if it were a football game. Can't blame you really, the school systems have systematically been beating this into our kids heads for the last two decades. Never think for yourself and never question authority. Just show up, line up, shut up, and do what we tell you. If you have a brain cell left functioning understand this, ALL POLITICIANS ARE crooks ..... thieves ..... and liars to the last man and woman BOTH sides of the aisle. Good luck with your partisan bickering.
Hey Genius, you failed to refute my point. Fools like you who think there's no difference between the parties that have led to this atrocity. Republican appointed judges are to blame for this law. There, even you may be able to understand.
In effect, the office of the most powerful man or woman in th world is for sale to the highest bidder. We ought to be really proud of ourselves for tolerating this but of course there will be 1000 excuses made for it because our crook, thief, and liar is better than the next guy's crook , thief, and liar. We're doomed, it's a natural fact. Welcome to the New World Order.
Well, no sh*t, Dick Tracy. Its been this way since the Nixon days of CRP (Committee to Re-elect the President). What possibly prompted you to wake up to that fact? Remember, the same SCOTUS that issued the Citizens United ruling found that money is "speech" ~ and its been screaming every since.
In order to believe you can prove it, you must believe in Santa Claus. It's too late to police this stuff. Once this amount of money was allowed into the presidential election, it was game over for ever being able to truly trace their legality. The only real way of ever getting proof of corroboration between a candidate and a Super PAC is to hope you can get your hands on a whistle-blower with actual proof in hand. Otherwise, PAC's can simply pay people ridiculous sums of money to shut up, and that's if it's deemed cheaper to pay them, and not just outright have them 'accidentally fall down an elevator shaft'.
While it's undeniable that the President changing his position is hypocritical, I also understand that Super PAC's can flood airwaves and influence the less than informed citizenry, who never do their own fact checking. Thus, a complete lie or fabrication can swing potential voters. The SCOTUS made the field this way, the President is only begrudgingly accepting that it's a tool he must back in order to win a reelection. I mean, I'd love to think that there are simply smart enough individuals out there to realize that Romney, Gingrich and Santorum are absolute scumbag, idiots with ridiculous ideology. But, that would assume I have faith in the general public of America. Which I don't.
Friends, it’s happened again! This time, the Nevada GOP destroys the caucus, and ruins it for Dr. Paul and the people of America! WOW! Please help me get this article to everyone and everywhere humanly possible! http://www.examiner.com/conspiracy-in-denver/nevada-vote-fraud-official