|
LINKS
OTHER RESOURCES
|
EXCLUSIVE: No Accountability of Obama Funds October 30, 2008 Democratic Presidential nominee Barack Obama reversed his pledge to take public financing for his campaign to become the first ever federal candidate in a general election to reject public matching funds. Why did he do this? One, there is no spending cap. If he took the public money he would have been limited to spending only $84 million like Senator John McCain chose to do. He may also have done so because of the way the Federal Election Commission (FEC) rules are constructed. If a candidate does take public matching funds, there are mandatory audits of contributions and expenditures. If a candidate refuses public funds, there is no automatic audit. Current FEC rules say that individuals who make contributions less than $200.00 do not have to disclose their name, address and occupation. However, if an individual makes several separate donations that exceed $200.00, then they must disclose. However, the Obama campaign is refusing to report and disclose those donors who have given multiple donations exceeding $200.00. It is also unlawful to contribute to a campaign in the name of another. With Obama's disclosure forms showing contributors named Mickey Mouse and Osama Bin Laden, it appears people are contributing using names other than their own. Obama’s campaign also admits to receiving millions of dollars from overseas. Americans living abroad can donate to the campaign but it is prohibited for any foreign national to contribute to American elections. The only way to enforce disclosure is to file a complaint with the FEC and request an audit since there is no automatic audit as is done with a campaign that takes public funds. The FEC has a commission of six members, three Democrats and three Republicans who are approved by the U.S. Senate. If there is a deadlock on an audit request, meaning three vote yes and three vote no, then no audit takes place. The Republican National Committee (RNC) recently filed a complaint to the FEC citing likely illegal donations to the Obama campaign. RNC Chief Counsel Sean Cairncross released the following statement concerning the complaint: "Based on numerous press accounts that have come to light since our initial filing in early October, it is clear that the Obama for America campaign is operating outside of the law. The complete and total lack of any control mechanisms within the Obama campaign's fundraising operation has undermined any confidence in their ability to curtail excessive, foreign, and fraudulent contributions and demands immediate attention from the Federal Election Commission (FEC)." To get this complaint considered, a majority on the FEC Commission, three Republicans and at least one Democrat, must agree to review the complaint and decide if they need to take action. In this highly partisan environment it is extremely unlikely that one Democrat on the panel will side with the Republicans and agree to audit the Obama campaign’s questionable contributions – especially before November 4th. Craig Engle a Partner at Arent Fox law firm in Washington D.C. and head of their political law group said that when someone files a complaint to the FEC it then becomes "under seal". He also said that the FEC will then give the Obama campaign a specific but reasonable deadline for them to respond back to the FEC. However the deadline and any response to the FEC remains secret. Also, any deliberations of the Commission remain secret. "Since there are so many questions surrounding Obama's contributions, his campaign should consider a voluntary audit to gain public confidence," Engle said. "A campaign of his size will almost definitely have some errors. No campaigns are perfect but full disclosure about where he is getting these large amounts of donations is critical for Americans to know that the money is legitimate," he said. Since, as stated in the Federal Register, “The Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971,as amended, 2 U.S.C. 431 et seq. (‘‘FECA’’ or ‘‘the Act’’), grants the Commission ‘exclusive jurisdiction with respect to civil enforcement,’’’ there will be no other way to challenge the Obama campaign – and Obama confidently realizes that.
|