IA-Gov: Draft Branstad PAC “ignores Iowa election law”

When Republican power-brokers formed the Draft Branstad PAC last month, I assumed that the entity was a political action committee, as implied by the name “PAC.” However, the Draft Branstad PAC registered with the Iowa Ethics & Campaign Disclosure Board as a 527 committee. The distinction is important, because unlike PACs, 527 groups do not have to disclose their donors and are not allowed to advocate for candidates.

Today the Iowa Democratic Party caught the folks in charge of the Draft Branstad effort running their 527 group like a PAC.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

October 9, 2009

DRAFT BRANSTAD GROUP IGNORES IOWA ELECTION LAW

DES MOINES, IA -The political action group called Draft Branstad, formed to promote Terry Branstad’s candidacy for Governor before he became a declared candidate, is ignoring Iowa ethics law and engaging in express advocacy for Branstad, who became a candidate on Wednesday, Iowa Democratic Party Chairman Michael Kiernan said Friday.

• FACT: Last night Draft Branstad hosted an event at Graze restaurant in West Des Moines.  The event included Branstad campaign paraphernalia and free drinks.  It was paid for by Draft Branstad and apparently the materials came from the same group.

• FACT: Draft Branstad continues to advertise on conservative websites.  Screen captures made Friday showed activity on multiple sites.

“This Draft Branstad group has spent funds directly benefiting the Branstad campaign,” Kiernan said Friday.  “That’s a blatant violation of Iowa campaign ethics law.”  Iowa election law prohibits 527 groups from engaging in express advocacy on behalf of any candidate or candidate’s committee.  

“Branstad should either embrace the spending of this group, since it’s a group designed by him to promote his candidacy, or publicly disavow it,” Kiernan said Friday.

Iowans know better.  They aren’t confused by the tactics being used to avoid both the letter and the spirit of campaign ethics law.  They know Branstad was behind the “movement” to draft him – and he knows why.  This campaign-that’s-not-a-campaign is a mockery of our system of democratic government and a slap in the face to Iowa’s bipartisan tradition of clean elections.

Now, we call upon Terry Branstad to:

1 Call upon the Draft Branstad group to cease and desist public statements and representations in his favor;

2 Disavow any expenditures already made by the Draft Branstad group after Tuesday, Oct. 6;

3 Call for the immediate disbanding of the Draft Branstad group based on Branstad’s decision to become a candidate on Wednesday, Oct. 7.

The leaders of the Draft Branstad PAC should know better than to make this kind of mistake, and Iowans should know better than to elect Terry Branstad again.

Fundraising for Freshman Democrats: The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly

The Hill published an article highlighting some of the fundraising efforts of freshmen Democrats in the House.  Apparently, many are doing quite well.  David Loebsack (IA-02) has raised about $71,000.  Kirsten Gillebrand (NY-20) has raised $65,000 in PAC money alone.  Earl Perlmutter (CO-07) has raised $79,000.  Charlie Wilson (OH-06) has raised $34,000.  Paul Hodes has raised $35,000.  Jason Altmire (PA-04) and Patrick Murphy (PA-08) have both raised $50,000 in PAC money alone.  Zack Space (OH-18) and Steven Kagen (WI-08) have both raised $35,000 in PAC money.

As far as simple financial numbers go, this is good news.  All of these candidates are vulnerable to some degree.  So, if all of these House members are already off to good starts, they may be able to force out potentially strong challenges early on.

But the article also has some worrying relevations.  For one thing, Nancy Boyda (KS-02) has raised only $13,000.  Considering the presidential vote in her district (Bush won it by 20 points), Boyda is probably one of our top five most vulnerable Democrats.  Plus, she will not have Sebelius’ coattails helping her and will instead have to contend with the Republican tide at the top of the ticket from the eventual Republican nominee and Senator Pat Roberts. Finally, she will possibly face a rematch against Jim Ryun. More over the flip…

However, the thing that is more disappointing to me than Boyda’s numbers (it’s early, give her some time) is where the other candidates are getting there money.  First, relying heavily on PAC money does not give the best image.  But beyond that, it’s a question of which PACs they’re getting donations from.

Both Gillebrand and Perlmutter have taken money from Altria, which represents the makers of Marlboro cigarettes. Loebsack and Perlmutter have received contributions from the American Bankers Association PAC while Perlmutter also has donations from Comcast and JP Morgan and Loebsack has donations from the American Association of Realtors.

It’s unsettling to see any elected officials taking money from cigarette makers.  It’s worse to see Democrats, liberal Democrats at that, doing that.  And while Comcast, et al. aren’t the scourge of Satan, I also don’t like the image of elected Democrats at their beg and call.

http://www.thehill.c…

My suggestion for anyone else who feels the way I do, is to donate through the Netroots and other liberal PACs like MoveOn and Democracy for America.  The more candidates and elected officials can get from the Netroots, the less they have to rely on PACs whose goals are sometimes/often/always contrary to the goals of progressives/working people/middle class/etc.

One should also note that Netroots heroes Jerry McNerney (CA-11), Carol Shea-Porter (NH-01), John Yarmuth (KY-03), Joe Sestak (PA-07), John Hall (NY-19), and Tim Walz (MN-01) are not mentioned in the article.  We need to act now to keep these people a)in Congress by making sure they have adequate resources to be re-elected and b)from becoming corrupted by negative interests.