Category: Kenneth St. Onge
FEC Battle Timeline
By Ken St. Onge
March 27, 2002 – President Bush signs the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (familiarly called the McCain-Feingold bill after its principal Senate sponsors), aimed at curbing the influence of “soft money” – unregulated spending by corporations, labor unions and wealthy individuals – in federal elections.
Oct. 8, 2002 – Reps. Marty Meehan (D-Mass.) and Christopher Shays (R-Conn.), the House sponsors of bill, file a lawsuit in U.S. District Court accusing the Federal Election Commission of failing to properly implement the new law.
July 10, 2003 – Shays introduces a new bill, co-sponsored by Meehan, called the Federal Election Administration Act of 2003, which sought to replace the commission with a new agency called the Federal Election Administration. That bill is currently before the House Administration Committee.
Dec. 10, 2003 – Supreme Court, in McConnell v FEC, upholds most provisions of the 2002 law, including bans on soft money and prohibitions on advertisements for or against specific candidates 60 days before an election.
Aug. 5, 2004 – Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, a nonprofit tax-exempt group, runs television ads alleging that Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry misrepresented his Vietnam War record. The ad sparks a controversy when it is revealed that Republican donors helped finance the group.
Sept. 14, 2004– Meehan and Shays file a second lawsuit, alleging FEC negligence in failing to regulate organizations such as the Swift Boat Veterans, which are called 527s after the tax code section that grants them tax-exempt status.
Sept. 20, 2004 – U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly rules for Meehan and Shays in their first lawsuit, over-turning 15 FEC regulations adopted to implement the 2002 law.
Sept. 22, 2004 –Meehan and Shays and Sens. John McCain (R-Ariz.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wis.) introduce the 527 Reform Act aimed at curbing 527 groups’ spending.
###
Meehan Battles FEC
Originally appeared in Lawrence Eagle-Tribune
By <a title="Kenneth St. Onge" href="https://www.bu.edu/washington/programs/journalism/student-work/fall-semester-2004/kenneth-st-onge/">Ken St. Onge</a>
WASHINGTON -- Frustrated with the Federal Election Commission's administration of the campaign finance reform law he sponsored in 2002, Congressman Martin T. Meehan, D-Mass., is waging legal and legislative battles to ensure the law's intent to clean up the election system is realized.
One of the biggest loopholes Meehan and other sponsors of the reform legislation are trying to close involves unregulated nonprofit advocacy groups known as 527s, named after the section of the tax code that awards tax-exempt status to the groups.
Some 527 groups have generated tremendous political controversy over the last year, particularly in early August, when one such group, Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, launched an attack ad criticizing the Vietnam War record of Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry. Critics say these groups often act in concert, either directly or indirectly, with candidates and parties to promote or discredit candidates while skirting campaign finance rules that limit contributions.
Meehan and the other campaign finance reform sponsors have been highly critical of the commission and are introducing legislation to regulate the 527s.
"At this juncture, the biggest impediment on fixing 527s is the FEC," Meehan said Wednesday. "We have two options here. We've filed suit against the FEC to try to change the rules and regulations they've promulgated, and we're filing this legislation today. Either one of those remedies would correct the problem."
Meehan, along with Congressman Christopher Shays, R-Conn., and Sens. John McCain, R-Ariz., and Russ Feingold, D-Wis., introduced the 527 Reform Act to regulate the status, disclosure rules and FEC filing requirements for 527 groups.
Though the 2002 law ostensibly outlawed unregulated "soft-money" campaign spending, the commission's rules allow such spending by the 527 groups when it isn't coordinated with a political campaign. The new bill would bar such spending by the 527s.
According to Steve Weiss of the Center for Responsive Politics -- a Washington-based nonpartisan group that tracks money raised by federal candidates, parties and outside organizations -- 527s active at the federal level have so far raised $192.2 million and spent $181.9 million in the 2003-2004 election cycle. Although previous election data are scattered, Weiss said, "we certainly expect that the amount of money raised by 527s will far exceed the amount they have ever raised."
The new bill is the legislative half of a two-pronged attack aimed at forcing the FEC to act on 527s. On Sept. 14, Meehan and Shays filed a lawsuit against the FEC, alleging the agency was negligent in failing to properly regulate those groups and contending they were required to do so under the 1974 law that established the commission.
It was not the first time Meehan and Shays have sued the FEC. On Monday, U.S. District Court Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ruled in their favor in a lawsuit the two had filed in October 2002 that accused the FEC of negligence in adopting regulations to implement the law enacted earlier that year. Her decision overturned 15 of 19 highly technical reporting requirements the FEC adopted that critics say promoted loopholes.
The judge's decision is unlikely to affect the current election cycle. At a press conference introducing the new bill, McCain -- who was not a party to the court case but did file a "friend-of-the court" brief -- lauded Meehan and Shays for their earlier court victory and called for the resignation of Bradley Smith and Ellen Weintraub, two of the FEC's six commissioners. McCain called the commission's failure to immediately implement the court's decision "bizarre" and "Orwellian."
In a telephone interview last week, Smith, who is the FEC chairman, dismissed McCain's statements and said the court case is a back-channel attempt to force the commission to adopt regulations that the legislators could not get through Congress.
"I'm pleased that (they) are finally doing what they ought to do if they are unhappy with the law," Smith said, "and that is introduce legislation to change it rather than engage in petty name-calling against the members of the commission. It doesn't do much credit to them as members of Congress or to the institution to which they serve."
