SEIU fined $200,000

They join Mark Schauer in bad company.

From the Secretary of State office

SEIU to pay almost $200,000 fine - the second-largest in Michigan - as part of campaign finance complaint settlement

MARCH 10, 2014
LANSING, Mich. – In what is the second-largest fine of its kind, the Service Employees International Union will pay $199,000 in penalties after the Michigan Department of State found there may have been campaign finance violations, Secretary of State Ruth Johnson announced today.
The penalties are part of a conciliation agreement reached by the department with Citizens for Affordable Quality Home Care and Home Care First, Inc., related to a 2012 ballot question to amend the state Constitution. Violations included commingling of funds; late filings; not identifying all accounts used; and not providing complete or accurate campaign statements. When combined with late filing fees already paid, they will have paid more than $205,000 in fines.
"Michigan law requires all organizations, including 501(c)4 nonprofit corporations, to file complete campaign finance reports when spending directly in support of a ballot question," Johnson said. "These organizations cannot be used as a means to conceal the identity of the true contributors. This agreement reflects our commitment to transparency and accountability in the campaign finance process, especially in an election year."
A complaint was originally filed in August of 2013, alleging that Home Care First filed its committee's statement of organization late to delay publicly reporting that SEIU contributions were the main source of support for the home health care ballot question.
Additional information, including the original complaint, is available on the MDOS website.

SB661 - My own thoughts

I'm not speaking for this as LCRC chair, but as someone who works in this field. 

There's some controversy about State Senate Bill 661. I think there's some good and bad with it. My own stance overall is that I support full disclosure and unlimited contributions. If someone wants to donate $25000, that's their choice. It should be fully disclosed, and voters need to make up their own mind if they have a problem with it or not in the primary or general elections.

I have discussed this issue with my reps and a few others. I'll put things in good, bad, or needs clarification categories.

Good:
A. Raises food contribution limit reporting requirement to $1000 (from $100). - This is one of those areas hard to track. When people donate pizza, drinks, etc for other volunteers, it adds up. In higher level campaigns, it can be a pain to track down all the receipts. 

B. Codifies "Issue ads" as not election ads. This follows the current case law, and stops "McCain Feingold" chilling of free speech. I don't always like issue ads, but I like censoring the mention of candidates and voting records even less.

C. Raising donation limits - Besides my "full disclosure" and "unlimited contribution" stances, This limits the money towards "issue ads" because candidate committees are more apt to talk about their own records instead of the opponents (usually done by friends of the program and not candidate committees). 

D. Cost of living increase for requiring reporting of employment information. Frankly, I think the requirement of reporting employment information should be gone anyway. Name and address alone should suffice.

Needs Clarification:
This text was hard to follow and should be cleaned up because I didn't know the reference until I called (nor did some others). Apparently it is substituting any communications for user unfriendly MERTS if there's a bunch of $5 donations.
For contributions of $5.00 or less by an individual to a

political committee or independent committee, the secretary of

state shall accept for filing any written communication from the

political committee or independent committee that contains the

information otherwise required under this subsection. Any such

written communication does not need to contain an original

signature.

 
Neutral:
Reports in non election year in July/October.  More work, but understand the reasoning.

Bad:
This language is removed. Caucus groups would not be able to get involved in primaries. That is a Pandora's Box waiting to happen.

(a) A house political party caucus committee or a senate

political party caucus committee shall not pay a debt incurred by a

candidate if that debt was incurred while the candidate was seeking

nomination at a primary election and the candidate was opposed at

that primary.

     (b) A house political party caucus committee or a senate

political party caucus committee shall not make a contribution to

or make an expenditure on behalf of a candidate if that candidate

is seeking nomination at a primary election and the candidate is

opposed at that primary.

I understand in some cases where one candidate in the primary would be significantly better than the other. I don't want to see a Sharron Angle nominated any more than the rest of the party. I also don't want to see another Pete Hoekstra (frankly non-existent) campaign either, and he was the favorite of many within the establishment. I've also seen absolute disasters on the federal level with the NRSC and to a lesser extent, NRCC.

Some good people that might get help will be tea party targets just because of "leadership" picking the candidates. This could make things harder for them. Some pet candidates who are bad news could get support due to being buddies with the right people, solely being an incumbent, or voting a certain way. Charlie Crist was originally supported by the NRSC. So was Arlen Specter before he switched parties.

The job of caucus is to increase the majority of Republicans. Money spent in primaries can be spent in general instead. The best way is to stay neutral in primaries, and support the winner. That's the fair way and best way to go.

A lot of this bill is good. The right amendment should solve the issues. 

EDITED TO ADD:
Amended bill passed the house - The caucus provisions regarding primaries is removed. Good to see that. Thank you state house. 

Ridiculous Law of the Week - Part 8 - Campaign Finance Senate Style

I don't have the citation offhand outside of PDF regulations, but as you'd guess, I would know this one. I do not often agree with Rich Robinson of Michigan's Campaign Finance Network. I'm not a big BCRA fan at all and support unlimited donation limits with full disclosure. However, this is bad.


The Free Press had this out. It's not entirely accurate, but it's close.

In this digital age of immediate news and information, the U.S. Senate is still stuck firmly in 20th Century.
Under arcane Senate rules, candidates don't have to file their campaign finance reports electronically and can, instead, go through a tedious process that holds up reports for weeks, even months.
"It allows them to hide who is bankrolling their campaigns," said Rich Robinson of the Michigan Campaign Finance Network, which tracks campaign spending. "When you think about the time and money they're wasting to play this stupid game, they really ought to be ashamed of themselves."
For the past decade, candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and president of the U.S. and political action committees have been required to file their campaign finance reports electronically with the Federal Elections Commission. The e-filing system, which also is used for most state office candidates, allows for almost immediate access to campaign finance reports -- which reveal who is contributing to campaigns and how candidates are spending their money.

I agree with using electronic filing for US Senate races. It makes it easier and in practicality for senate reports, we use FECFile anyway for limit checks, validation, and data entry so we can print the long reports on the computer easier. I have to make a correction. If we are treasurers for US Senate campaigns - we HAVE to go by hand. It is required. There is no "don't have to file" electronically. We are not allowed to do so and you can check the FEC's candidate committee manual to find that in the small print. I can't just send it electronically to the FEC. We aren't directly governed by the FEC, but the Secretary of the Senate. That means I have to print out the dozens of pages of data from FECFile, mail it to Virginia, and keep checking to make sure they have it. It creates more work, and worse, I'm not 100% in control of the situation. It's not like I can just drive off to DC if there's a problem unlike Howell or Lansing. 

One other thing not mentioned  with the extra day is that there's two different possible due dates. For example April 15th was the last due date. It was a Sunday, so in reality it was moved up to the 13th (unlike taxes). If the report was sent on the 13th using regular first class mail, then the committee better open up its checkbook. Under first class mail, the Secretary of the Senate needs to receive the report by the 15th. If certified mail is used, it's okay, even though it's still first class mail in delivery time. The due date under certified mail is by postmarked. Needless to day, I always use certified to be safe.

Argus story on illegal MEA affiliate mailing

I had an eye on this for awhile. As I posted the other day.

How many folks in the Brighton School District got a postcard mailing from the Brighton Education Association? On it, it says "Paid for by Brighton Education Association." However, there is no PAC by that name listed at the County Clerks office, nor the Michigan Secretary of State. The BEA did it again.

This isn't the first go around with the local MEA affiliates. Brighton/Howell. Howell seemed to clean up its act on its mailing after they got turned in for an anonymous mailing. They go through East Lansing for their mailing. HEA is an MEA affiliate, so that's perfectly legal.

This is however two in a row for the Brighton MEA. They got lucky in their defense with the John Conely mailing and got off on a technicality. It was one of those "definition of is" types of situations because of the wording of the ad. If you think I'm going to post the exact technicality here, you're crazy. I'm not giving anybody a blueprint to skirt the campaign finance regulations here. The BEA/MEA broke laws regarding PACs, but it couldn't be proven at that time because of one word not on the ad. This time however.....Son, your egos are writing checks your bodies can't cash.

The Argus had a story on this

Brighton Area Schools Board of Education member Bill Anderson believes a postcard sent out by the Brighton Education Association teachers' union supporting candidate Bill Trombley was illegal and plans to file a complaint with state election officials.

Trombley, making his first bid for the school board, was elected Tuesday and defeated incumbent Greg Rassel.

The postcard, sent out Nov. 1 to Brighton area voters, states it was paid by the Brighton Education Association. It also has several comments by Trombley stating why he was running. Of the four candidates running, the teachers' union endorsed only Trombley.

Anderson said it's a violation of campaign finance laws for a teachers' union to pay for campaign literature. He also said the postcard must be an independent piece that supports a candidate; instead, he said this postcard appears to be sent directly from Trombley.

"The problem is they failed to identify their political action committee on here," said Anderson, who is a legislative liaison for the Michigan Townships Association.

Addressing Anderson's points.

I think it's the PAC that paid for it, based on the newsletter comment, however the disclaimer doesn't mention a PAC. Someone else also turned them in, and on that complaint stated a failure to file campaign finance reports and statements of organization. I saw the complaint and double checked it. It's solidly backed up with evidence.

As far as the independent expenditures, PAC money can pay for just about anything they want as long as the expenditure is reported. What makes something "independent" is who paid for it. It's a bit sneaky with the terms "I am running" which is something I actually didn't notice. I'd have to check a few things to determine the legality of that, but I think it's still legal as long as the paid for by disclaimer is listed. I'll have to see what's considered "misleading" by law.

However, a BEA newsletter from October states a political action committee paid for the cards, "not BEA money."

I saw that newsletter. That "PAC," much like that 8-d Coordinating Council PAC, described in the newsletter is also not registered with the County Clerk or Secretary of State's office. THAT's what makes this mailing illegal. This
"PAC", which is been around for at least two election cycles, has not been registered. The statement of organization has not been filed. Triannual statements (if state) or Pre/Post General statements (if county) have not been filed. That's the illegality.

Anderson said this isn't the first time the teachers' union has had a problem with campaign literature.

"We're having a pattern here," Anderson said.

It's the 3rd time in the county alone that I've caught. And the MEA wonders why so many folks don't like their leadership. Maybe something like this can send a message, or at least a Mark Schaueresque fine.

I wouldn't expect anything less from MEA leadership at either state or local levels. I hope they now enjoy Tom McMillin as committee chair.

Rise of embezzlement in campaign accounts

There's a very interesting and disturbing story in Bloomberg News that hits close to home with me. I've long been preaching about how important it is to get a good and trustworthy treasurer if you are running a campaign or forming a PAC. Some of my previous posts on this area are as follows.

Shameless business plug for my company, posted in 2009

2006 - What not to do. This was one of the inspirations of me forming the business.

From 2008 - Report on an embezzlement

From Bloomberg

Representative Susan Davis’ latest letter to supporters said: “We have been robbed!!”

Davis, 67, is one of several California Democrats whose campaign accounts were allegedly looted during the past year by their treasurer, Kinde Durkee. On Sept. 10, Davis sent out the appeal to begin rebuilding her account.

Five days after Durkee’s arrest in Burbank on Sept. 2, Representative Frank LoBiondo’s former campaign treasurer was sentenced to 30 months in prison for embezzling more than $450,000 from the New Jersey Republican’s campaign committee.

As candidates raise more money for their campaigns, there is greater opportunity for nefarious treasurers to embezzle campaign cash from politicians accustomed to putting their careers in the hands of consultants, aides and volunteers, said Michael Toner, a former Federal Election Commission chairman.

I'm not surprised at this at all, and it has nothing to do with partisanship. Campaigns are getting more expensive. I had sole control of a small non-political account one time and still wrote a $20,000 check. Reminded me of tuition. When you have that type of control, and the knowledge to go with it, it's not hard for a bad guy to put the money where it doesn't belong. One thing I insist on when doing this work to protect my myself is to make sure somebody else, preferably the candidate or campaign manager, sign any checks that go to my company.

Right now is in particularly dangerous time with these issues. Campaigns are in transitional mode. Candidates HATE this part of the campaign, with a passion. Fundraising they don't like. Administrative work they despise. Treasurers are often a volunteer who is very close to the candidate. Those that do the research and find out what they are in for get scared and either get bogged down and overwhelmed or look for a professional or someone who can freelance as a professional due to an accounting background elsewhere or something else. A friend of a friend. A cold call. That person often has total control. Keep in mind that this business is based all on trust. Candidates often trust campaign managers and/or treasurers with everything, and the friend of the friend is placed with the same trust. That unfortunately sometimes backfires.

Such thefts are “almost entirely preventable,” said David Mason, another Federal Election Commission chairman who is a senior vice president at Washington-based Aristotle Inc., a political consulting company. “Politicians still want to rely on trust. It’s a personal business.”

Election lawyers said thefts are increasing as campaign treasuries grow and candidates rely on the same person to pay the bills and track the expenses. The average House member spent $1.4 million to win election in 2010, compared with $840,300 a decade earlier, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, a Washington-based research group that tracks campaign spending.

Some of those races are about 1/10th that amount. Others are 20 million plus. Regardless of it being a 25K race or 25 million race,, it's still serious money, and a lot of power given to a treasurer. I can do a lot with 450K. Three things I can do with that are to destroy my name and reputation, betray those who trusted me, and go to club fed. No thanks. I'll use that 450K for its intended purpose, the campaign. Others obviously haven't and are now in prison. Some are probably getting away with it.

This is one of the best quotes I've seen. Leave it to an in-house attorney to say it best.

These officeholders flip over the keys to these professional treasurers in a way they would never do for their own savings,” said former National Republican Senatorial Committee general counsel Craig Engle, founder of Arent Fox LLP’s political law group and treasurer of the firm’s political action committee. “The more time an officeholder is spending going over his spending, the less effective a candidate he or she will be.”

As a professional treasurer/record keeper, that's true. With all the requirements, candidates, especially in large areas, don't want to deal with this stuff. Neither do their campaign managers. "Dan, take care of this. Do whatever needs to be done." "Got it." Candidates want to meet people, knock on doors, and get their name out in a positive way. They want to be talking to me about in house business as little as possible. It doesn't gain them the votes they need to win.

Here's more.

Professional Treasurers

In the past, treasurers were often family friends or prominent local figures, Engle said. As record-keeping became more complicated, candidates brought in professionals, with no personal connections to them, to handle the job. They found them by word-of-mouth and recommendations; Durkee could sign checks on more than 400 bank accounts, including an undisclosed number of political committees, according to an Federal Bureau of Investigation affidavit.

“As politics has become a regulated industry, the need for professional treasurers, or campaign finance officers, has increased dramatically,” Engle said. “What you see on reports now are professional political treasurers who are handling the books and records. No longer is it a friend or big wheel. It’s someone who does it for a living.”

Here's my recommendation. Put two names on the account - the treasurer and preferably either the campaign manager or assistant manager, and have the treasurer write the checks with the exception of the treasurer's fees. I don't like writing campaign business checks from the campaign to my own business. It looks bad, even if its a legitimate transaction. The lure for a bad guy to steal the campaign money is less when someone is checking the monthly bank statements, especially one that would know the companies receiving the money. "What's Shell Game, incorporated?" "Uhhh.." "Who did we work with there?" "Uhhhh." "I'm calling the feds." There doesn't need to be micromanagement, but there should be just enough of an eye on the account to know that no shenanigans are going on.

Lastly:

Election lawyers say it’s easy to prevent such thefts. Candidates can require two signatures on accounts, have different people responsible for depositing donations and writing checks, bring in a third person to review the books regularly, and keep an eye on campaign funds the way they would their personal bank accounts.

Beyond the lost cash, candidates and political committees can also face financial penalties from the FEC for filing what turn out to be false disclosure reports.

I'd add carbon copies of the checks as well. This is a Double whammy. Sometimes the FEC or Sec of State may give a break to a campaign for this type of stuff, but it's still just a terrible thing to go through. I don't wish it on any campaign, and I hope those that do this stuff spend a long time in Club Fed.

There's some more details about things at Bloomberg news site. It's a must read for anyone tied into the nuts and bolts of campaigning.

With the campaign season heating up, It's time for all those forming committees to think hard about how they are going to handle the treasury position. Committees need to make sure that whoever they have is someone who is both trustworthy and competent. I still do this work, and if you are interested in a good treasurer, my contact information is at my Company Website.

Argus Story on the Conely and MEA/8-D Coordinating Council Mailing

I went into detail about the illegality of this mailing here and here.

The Argus investigated the claims by the 8-D Coordinating Council in today's paper. Here's the story on the mailing

Somebody didn't do their homework before sending out a postcard attacking Brighton Area Schools Board of Education candidate John Conely — and it turned out to be leaders of the district teachers' union.

The 8-D Coordinating Council PAC, a political action committee for Livingston County teachers' unions, sent out a postcard last week to Brighton-area voters linking Conely to 21 lawsuits in Livingston County.

The postcard asks, "Is this the kind of person you want for Brighton school board?" The postcard arrived in homes five days before Tuesday's general election.

The Daily Press & Argus reviewed all the cases and learned only 13 of the 21 involved the school board candidate. The other eight cases involved his father, longtime Brighton businessman Jack Conely, whose legal name is John D. Conely.

The mailing said a key word regarding the civil cases mentioned. It said involved. It did not say "found liable." It did not even say who was the plaintiff or defendant, nor mention if there was a settlement. Most of them were landlord tenant related. How often are those cases in court? If a customer did not pay the rent on his car or property, he was sued after a certain period. That's not unusual. I saw "civil infraction" on that list. Contested Traffic ticket. Big deal.

Barry Goode, president of the Brighton Education Association teachers' union and the 8-D Coordinating Council, disputed there were inaccuracies in the postcard.

Barry should get hit his own checkbook ready and pay up for not having his illegal PAC file its Statement of Organization (over 30 days late) and pre-general report.

There's more on the PAC:

The postcard clearly states it was paid with "regulated funds by the 8-D Coordinating Council PAC." The address is the local office of the Michigan Education Association office in Genoa Township. The MEA is the largest statewide teachers' union.

Although the MEA representative for Brighton schools wasn't available for comment, Barb Cameron, UniServ director for Hartland Consolidated Schools and Howell Public Schools, explained how the coordinating council and its PAC operate. Cameron and other UniServe directors are partially funded by the MEA and serve as liaisons between the state and local unions.

Cameron said the coordinating council is comprised of local teachers' union presidents and other teachers, and the PAC is an offshoot of the council. She said teachers donate money, which is separate from their dues, to the MEA. The MEA then distributes a portion back to local PACs. The coordinating council interviews local candidates and makes recommendations.

Cameron said this particular PAC is legitimate and subject to very strict guidelines.

This PAC is currently illegitimate and not following the most basic of guidelines. It's not registered with the Secretary of State nor with the County Clerk. There is no Statement of Organization. There also isn't any pre-general election report filed. As the local MEA's own newsletter points out, this PAC has been in operation for a period. It needed to file, and it failed to do so.

That's why I turned them into the Secretary of State's office.

Latest on MEA and 8-D Coordinating Council related shenanigans

In my last piece, I wrote about MEA being up to its illegal tricks. There's more evidence of illegalities.

Here's the newsletter from the BEA, Brighton's MEA branch. They discussed the PAC they formed here, and have admitted to raising money for the PAC. However, they did not register this PAC with either the County Clerk or the State of Michigan. They also failed to file any pre-general reports, as there isn't even a Statement of Organization. They certainly had enough to do a massive mailing of deceit.

A special thanks goes out to Barry Goode and the MEA's newsletter discussing the PAC. It made things easy when it came to turning your arses into the state. I attached those PAC pages, along with other evidence and sent it to Lansing for official filing.

I talked to a couple people in Howell Schools today, and I'm waiting for a scanned copy of their card. Unlike the Brighton mailing, this was a typical "support candidate x" piece from the MEA. It also has a disclaimer of paid for by MEA PAC (although with the wrong address for their PAC - as their PAC is from East Lansing). The address the MEA used was 3399 E Grand River Suite 203.....their branch office. That's the same office as the "8-D Coordinating Council" which sent the deceitful BS about John Conely.


If you're tired of the MEA and their cronies setting bad examples for our teachers with their illegalities, vote for John Conely in Brighton, or Mike Moloney, and Doug Moore if you're in the Howell School District.

MEA is up to their illegal tricks again

If you are in Brighton schools, you probably got a nasty illegal postcard spreading misinformation and disinformation about John Conely, courtesy of the MEA or its affiliate. This isn't the first time the MEA broke the law in their mailings. More information on that previous illegal mailing is here and here

Here's the front of the postcard with the name and address retracted.

What's illegal about that? I also said MEA. That card says something about "8-D Coordinating Council PAC" instead of the MEA. There's the problem. There is no 8-D Coordinating Council PAC registered anywhere in the Secretary of State's website, nor is it registered at the county clerk's elections division. I called the clerk's office today, and I checked their website. The PAC is not registered.

From the Michigan Campaign Finance Act

169.247 Printed matter or radio or television paid advertisement having reference to election, candidate, or ballot question; names and addresses; rules; exemptions; statement that payment made “with regulated funds”; violation as misdemeanor; penalty.

Sec. 47.

(1) Except as otherwise provided in this subsection and subject to subsections (3) and (4), a billboard, placard, poster, pamphlet, or other printed matter having reference to an election, a candidate, or a ballot question, shall bear upon it the name and address of the person paying for the matter. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection and subject to subsections (3) and (4), if the printed matter relating to a candidate is an independent expenditure that is not authorized in writing by the candidate committee of that candidate, the printed matter shall contain the following disclaimer: "Not authorized by any candidate committee". An individual other than a candidate is not subject to this subsection if the individual is acting independently and not acting as an agent for a candidate or any committee.

(2) A radio or television paid advertisement having reference to an election, a candidate, or a ballot question shall identify the sponsoring person as required by the federal communications commission, shall bear the name of the person paying for the advertisement, and shall be in compliance with subsection (3) and with the following:

(a) If the radio or television paid advertisement relates to a candidate and is an independent expenditure, the advertisement shall contain the following disclaimer: "Not authorized by any candidate".

(b) If the radio or television paid advertisement relates to a candidate and is not an independent expenditure but is paid for by a person other than the candidate to which it is related, the advertisement shall contain the following disclaimer:

"Authorized by ............................................".
(name of candidate or name of candidate committee)
(3) The size and placement of an identification or disclaimer required by this section shall be determined by rules promulgated by the secretary of state. The rules may exempt printed matter and certain other items such as campaign buttons or balloons, the size of which makes it unreasonable to add an identification or disclaimer, from the identification or disclaimer required by this section.

(4) Except for a candidate committee's printed matter or radio or television paid advertisements, each identification or disclaimer required by this section shall also indicate that the printed matter or radio or television paid advertisement is paid for "with regulated funds". Printed matter or a radio or television paid advertisement that is not subject to this act shall not bear the statement required by this subsection.

(5) A person who knowingly violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000.00, or imprisonment for not more than 93 days, or both.

OR they did not file a Statememt of Organization for not being registered.

169.224 Statement of organization; time for filing; late filing fee; violation as misdemeanor; contents of statement; name of sponsor; amendment; statement as to receipts or expenditures; filing statement indicating dissolution of committee; exception.

Sec. 24.

(1) A committee shall file a statement of organization with the filing officials designated in section 36 to receive the committee's campaign statements. A statement of organization shall be filed within 10 days after a committee is formed. A filing official shall maintain a statement of organization filed by a committee until 5 years after the official date of the committee's dissolution. A person who fails to file a statement of organization required by this subsection shall pay a late filing fee of $10.00 for each business day the statement remains not filed in violation of this subsection. The late filing fee shall not exceed $300.00. A person who violates this subsection by failing to file for more than 30 days after a statement of organization is required to be filed is guilty of a misdemeanor punishable by a fine of not more than $1,000.00.

(2) The statement of organization required by subsection (1) shall include the following information:

(a) The name, street address, and if available, the telephone number of the committee. If a committee is a candidate committee, the committee name shall include the first and last name of the candidate. A committee address may be the home address of the candidate or treasurer of the committee.

(b) The name, street address, and if available, the telephone number of the treasurer or other individual designated as responsible for the committee's record keeping, report preparation, or report filing.

(c) The name and address of the financial institution in which the official committee depository is or is intended to be located, and the name and address of each financial institution in which a secondary depository is or is intended to be located.

(d) The full name of the office being sought by, including district number or jurisdiction, and the county residence of each candidate supported or opposed by the committee.

(e) A brief statement identifying the substance of each ballot question supported or opposed by the committee. If the ballot question supported or opposed by the committee is not statewide, the committee shall identify the county in which the greatest number of registered voters eligible to vote on the ballot question reside.

(f) Identification of the committee as a candidate committee, political party committee, independent committee, political committee, or ballot question committee if it is identifiable as such a committee.

(3) An independent committee or political committee shall include in the name of the committee the name of the person or persons that sponsor the committee, if any, or with whom the committee is affiliated. A person, other than an individual or a committee, sponsors or is affiliated with an independent committee or political committee if that person establishes, directs, controls, or financially supports the administration of the committee. For the purposes of this subsection, a person does not financially support the administration of a committee by merely making a contribution to the committee.

(4) If any of the information required in a statement of organization is changed, the committee shall file an amendment when the next campaign statement is required to be filed. An independent committee or political committee whose name does not include the name of the person or persons that sponsor the committee or with whom the committee is affiliated as required by subsection (3) shall file an amendment to the committee's statement of organization not later than the date the next campaign statement is required to be filed after the effective date of the amendatory act that added this sentence.

(5) When filing a statement of organization, a committee, other than an independent committee, a political committee, or a political party committee, may indicate in a written statement signed by the treasurer of the committee that the committee does not expect for each election to receive an amount in excess of $1,000.00 or expend an amount in excess of $1,000.00.

(6) When filing a statement of organization, an independent committee, a political committee, or a political party committee may indicate in a written statement signed by the treasurer of the committee that the committee does not expect in a calendar year to receive or expend an amount in excess of $1,000.00.

(7) Upon the dissolution of a committee, the committee shall file a statement indicating dissolution with the filing officials with whom the committee's statement of organization was filed. Dissolution of a committee shall be accomplished pursuant to rules promulgated by the secretary of state under the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306, MCL 24.201 to 24.328.

(8) A candidate committee that files a written statement pursuant to subsection (5) shall not be required to file a dissolution statement pursuant to subsection (7) if the committee failed to receive or expend an amount in excess of $1,000.00 and 1 of the following applies:

(a) The candidate was defeated in an election and has no outstanding campaign debts or assets.

(b) The candidate vacates an elective office and has no outstanding campaign debts or assets.


History: 1976, Act 388, Eff. June 1, 1977 ;-- Am. 1977, Act 311, Imd. Eff. Jan. 4, 1978 ;-- Am. 1985, Act 138, Imd. Eff. Oct. 22, 1985 ;-- Am. 1989, Act 95, Imd. Eff. June 21, 1989 ;-- Am. 1994, Act 117, Eff. Apr. 1, 1995 ;-- Am. 1999, Act 237, Eff. Mar. 10, 2000
Admin Rule: R 169.1 et seq. of the Michigan Administrative Code.

Either way it is $1000 that either the MEA or the so called "8-D Coordinated Committee PAC" should owe for their violatons. What brings the MEA involved here. Notice the address. 3399 E Grand River Suite 203, Howell MI. That is HQ for Central Zone MEA 8d

The MEA has a PAC. Why haven't they just used their PAC address? Maybe because it has an East Lansing official mailing address and they did not want that going out to voters. Maybe because they don't have the most stellar reputation in this county due to the antics of Joyce Powers and company on the Brighton School Board. John Conely is a threat to them, and they know it.

Either the MEA used a false address and name for their disclaimer, or their local affiliate failed to register as a PAC. Either way, they resorted to illegal tactics to do so. It's not the first time. That's how the MEA does things. It's unacceptable, and I'm turning them in for the 2nd time.

To the Livingston County Democrats - those in glass houses shouldn't throw stones

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Campaign Finance Statements almost due - heads up

It's almost campaign finance season. The due date for candidates in the August Primary to turn in the reports is July 23rd. This is for ALL candidates appearing on the ballot. That includes those unopposed in the primary. That includes those unopposed in the general election. That includes local as well as state level candidates.

I've on several occasions why one needs a good treasurer when running a campaign. Today we have another example in the papers close to home. This was an honest mistake, and the fines were waved by county. However, it still brings bad press, and former leftist AP reporter and County Dems chair Judy Daubenmier is going to make sure of it. From the Argus:

he Livingston County Democrats said incumbent Republican County Commissioner Carol Griffith should have been fined "thousands" of dollars for not filing campaign-spending reports for the 2008 election cycle.

Griffith — who ran unchallenged that year and said this week the document error was an honest mistake — didn't seek waivers to filing the documents, which are normally granted for candidates who spend less than $1,000, as Griffith did, said County Clerk Margaret Dunleavy.

County Democratic Party Chairwoman Judy Daubenmier issued a press release Tuesday claiming Griffith received special treatment because Secretary of State Terri Lynn Land is also a Republican.

Uhhh, Judy, did you have that illegal 50/50 fundraiser during the same period as Carol's campaign? You know what they say about people in glass houses. If you want to play gotcha politics on campaign finance issues with my county, you better have a clean house, because we will find your campaign finance skeletons.

However, all of us need to take this as a learning experience. Carol admits her mistakes.

Griffith said she didn't exceed the $1,000 spending mark in 2008 and didn't need to because she was running unopposed for Board of Commissioners District 7, which covers all of the city of Brighton and part of Genoa Township.
She learned of the document error by the county Democrats, and said she has since corrected what she called an "honest mistake."

"It has been corrected. I am in compliance," Griffith said.

"I am moving on from this," she added.

I agree that it was an honest mistake, and one that is easy to make. Carol was a first time candidate.  I suspect Carol thought she was originally going to run a competitive campaign, and was surprised to find at the 2008 filing deadline that she was unopposed both in the primary and general elections. She probably either A, forgot to amend her S&O to check the waiver wire or B, thought she didn't have to file if she didn't spend money or didn't have an opponent. It doesn't matter in the eyes of the campaign finance laws. They look at things differently.

She was lucky. This could have been another Edmund Senkowski if it wasn't caught when it was. That would be bad news, embarrassing for all of us, and cost her a lot of money. She still made the papers, and that's something that should be avoided if possible for things like this.

We all need to take this as a learning experience. One thing that our local party needs to do, especially in 2010 for the township offices, is to teach our candidates what they need to know about campaign finance procedures. It is extremely easy to screw up. State rep candidates do that all the time. I have a side business that handles these matters so there are no screw ups and candidates have less worries. If you don't want to use my business, then make sure whoever handles these matters is good. Else, you run a higher risk of bad press, fines, and having your campaign put on defense.

July 23rd, folks. Remember that date.

Campaign Finance Statements are due February 1

If you just filed for election, you better be ready for the campaign finance laws. If you filed your committee (or PAC) in 2009, your annual statement is due February 1 for the 2009 period. This is some free advice from a professional. Know the due dates. Don't wait till the last minute like most people. I see troubles happen on these filings all the time.

I turned my committee report in on the 15th with plenty of time to spare since I was concerned about a computer error. It turned out alright, but I'm not taking any chances. It's my arse on the line, and the last thing I want to happen to me is a fine, my name in the papers, blogs, or AP wires for being late, and loss of credibility on these matters. That bad press can be avoided by playing things by the book.

Here is what not to do. I really don't want to keep picking on Edmund Senkowski, but it's a perfect example of what can happen if there is trouble. For those who don't know, Senkowski ran against Joe Hune in 2004 for state rep in the 47th district where I lived at the time. To say he had campaign finance problems is an understatement. I don't think he was shady. I think his treasurer was lazy and clueless instead. He has thousands of dollars owed in late fees. $6075.00 in fines to be exact. That's more then he had in his campaign. I know at least one democrat was on his back a little for the campaign finance matters during the campaign.

That's why I started a side business that specialized in campaign finance compliance. If you are running for office or want to start a PAC, you need a competent treasurer that will avoid the pitfalls all too common to committees. That treasurer can be myself, or somebody else. I've never been fined in 9 years of treasury experience with campaigns on all levels outside of caucus, presidential, and gubernatorial. I've treasured candidate committees, PAC's, ballot questions, and party committees, along with administrative non-political accounts.

Good luck to those running, and make sure you turn the filings in ASAP to avoid trouble if you haven't already.

Are you running or managing a campaign, PAC, or ballot committee? Hire the best.

Normally I prefer to talk about topics here instead of myself, but this is a shameless plug. If your committee needs a treasurer, let me know. Here's my business website. Republican Michigander Consulting LLC.

This is a personal blog not tied to the business, so I'll go into a little more detail and bluntness here which I did not post on the business website. There is an excellent FAQ there that can answer many questions.

Campaign finance compliance. It is where I started in politics as a 22 year old "kid" on a PAC and it is what I do best today at nearly 31 years of age. I am quite good at keeping committees out of trouble. I have not been fined for campaign finance violations, neither by the FEC, Secretary of State, or county clerk. Ever. That has been the case for nearly nine years and eight accounts/committees. I've not had an errors/omissions notice (similar to a "fix-it" ticket) since 2002. I get the job done right the first time. I've treasured skeleton crews to major operations of tens which rake in tens of thousands of dollars. The only committee type I have not treasured is a gubernatorial committee. One of my tri-annual reports for a PAC was 79 pages. I know what to do. I know what not to do.

Almost all candidates and campaign managers, even those who are very knowledgeable about this issue, absolutely despise the reports. It's tedious. It's time consuming if you are not experienced. There's a lot of laws and rules that the committee must know in order to be compliant. Candidates or managers often do the treasury job themselves, or often have some volunteer who is inexperienced do it. In some cases it works. It worked for me back in early 2001 because I was ambitious and always had an interest at the information available in campaign finance. I still wasn't perfect then and got error/omissions noticed and had to do extra work to fix it. I could probably do that work in one third of the time today that it took me back in 2001 without a "fix it." That's experience. Even then, there were no failure to file, late filings, or other disasters. Besides the fines, late filings and failure to files are oftentimes news. Edmund Senkowski's campaign finance problems were a big story in the Argus. The MEA's lawbreaking made the Argus. Others make the AP wires.

Several times in the past, I've written about campaign finance things on this blog.

In 2007, I turned the MEA in for not disclaiming who paid for their ad. The Argus picked up on this and ran with the story. I had to make sure my I's were dotted and T's were crossed when filing. It turned out the story was true, but the HEA (Howell) took the blame for it in public. I was hoping Lansing would get nailed. The follow through is posted here, and the third story was here.

For those who want to know who owes the big money there's the story on that from 2006. Mr. Senkowski still owes the fines from his campaign and is racking up more fines as we speak by ignoring it. It's up to over $6000 now.

This was my post in February of 2006. Why a Good treasurer is a must for a campaign. The same holds true nearly four years later.

Monday, February 06, 2006
Why a good treasurer is a must for a campaign
Dan Meisler and the Argus today set its sights on Edmund Senkowski, who was Joe Hune's opponent in 2004.

""Edmund Senkowski, the Democratic candidate who ran unsuccessfully against state Rep. Joe Hune, R-Hamburg Township, in the 2004 election for state House, owes the state more than $4,000 in fines for not filing campaign finance disclosure reports.
The Michigan Department of State has sent Senkowski six notices of past-due fines totaling $4,075 for either filing documents past the deadlines, or not filing them at all.""

I briefly mentioned this in a previous post, but I didn't fire both barrels at Edmund Senkowski on this. I knew about this back in 2004, but decided to hold my fire since Senkowski had no chance to win with the campaign (or lack of) that he was running. I told Joe Hune and a few others I personally knew, but that's about it. Joe had a good record to run on and was going to coast to a 70-30 win, and as far as I knew, Senkowski wasn't being a jerk, so a negative attack wasn't going to help either Joe or myself.

The lesson from this story is that candidates (both republican and democrat) need to know what they are getting into when they are running. The other lesson is that they need to have their most competent and trustworthy individual be their treasurer. From what I could see from a distance, Senkowski had no clue whatsoever on filing matters, and neither did his treasurer, presumably a family member. If anyone here knows Senkowski, they should tell him to call the Sec of State and get this taken care of ASAP. Sometimes they will drop or reduce fines, but ignoring them isn't going to help matters. Mistakes happen and can be corrected with amended reports, but "failure to file" is the worst possible choice to make.

For future candidates, one thing that helps is the waiver box for extremely low budget campaigns (under $1000). Those who check that box and raise less than $1000 do not have to file reports. Those who check the box and raise over $1000 need to file them.

One thing I can say is that I've never been fined on anything I have treasured, and I've done treasury and filing work off and on for five years. Everything's been turned in on time, and anything with mistakes has been corrected with a pain in the neck Amended report. I hate amendment reports and haven't had to do one since I was a rookie. I don't play games with this stuff. They've seen it all, and even Geoff Fieger got caught.

Part of knowing what to find and not find regarding campaign finance is not just related to filling out the reports and knowing the disclaimers are posted. Two committees were tied up with raffles. That's illegal in Michigan. The Livingston Democrats planned a 50/50 back in 2008. In 2006, Citizens for Wildlife Conservation got nailed rightly so (unfortunately) for a raffle.

My last campaign finance related post was commenting on a weasel of a bill that allowed violators to wait a year before paying their fines. That needs to go nowhere.

In campaigns there are two things. There are things you can control, and things you can't control. Campaign finance situations are things that can be controlled. The most important thing a candidate can do is to have a good treasurer.

Michigan has full disclosure. That's something that is very important to know. There are a few people whose money I will stay away from if I am running for political office. I will have a lot of explaining to do if I report donations from people like Mark Foley (obvious reasons), Josh Sugarmann (for anti-2nd Amendment views), or illegal sources. (Corporations, foreigners). Good treasurers can screen this, and that goes double on the illegal sources.

If you run or manage a campaign, know what you are getting into and be prepared. All it takes is one major controllable error to destroy the entire campaign. A good treasurer will make sure it is not on the campaign finance side of the campaign. In nine years, that has not happened with me, and I have every intention of keeping that streak alive to twenty-five or more years.

If you are interested in running for office, managing a campaign, forming a PAC, or forming a ballot question committee, contact me through my business website if you are interested in a good experienced treasurer. I have a no fine guarantee with my work.

If I have to follow campaign finance laws, you should too

The Argus hit the nail on the head with this editorial.

From the Argus

One of life's most difficult challenges is to select the dumbest idea to come out of the Michigan Legislature. There are just so many worthy contenders.
Advertisement

But it may be hard to top the proposed law that would allow a time payment plan of up to a year for state lawmakers who couldn't be bothered to comply with state campaign-finance laws that were passed by ... well, by state lawmakers.

That's what is in the bill package introduced by state Rep. Fred Durhal Jr., D-Detroit. House Bills 4713 and 4714 were introduced in March. Thankfully, nothing has come of them since then.

Here's the deal. People running for office are supposed to file campaign reports that detail what they spend, where they spend it and who contributed to their campaign. There is a deadline. If the deadline isn't met, the candidate is fined.

Current law also says that you can't be sworn in as a state lawmaker if you have outstanding fines. That apparently is what motivated Durhal. He said a colleague faced a hurdle when asked to pay $4,000 in fines before taking office.

He said that was a "flaw in the law" and now wants the secretary of state to allow payments of late filing and other fees and fines for up to 12 months.

But it's not a flaw in the law. It's a flaw with the state lawmaker who failed to follow the law. If he or she — Durhal won't identify the offender — had filed on time (which is to say, obeyed the law) — then there wouldn't be a problem. There wouldn't have been any fines.

The bills are crap. If I have to follow the law, you should too.

Who's the culprit? Durhal's campaign has a few fines. Durhal's campaign finance sheet is here. He coughed up $200 in fines. Maybe the offender is Durhal, who ironically, I believe is an ex-cop. Durhal was also the treasurer in addition to the candidate. No excuses.

I have over eight and almost nine years of experience as a treasurer, and have dealt with both the FEC and the Secretary of State's office. It's a pain in the arse at times to deal with the requirements and the deadlines. Candidates are overwhelmed by it and hate the campaign finance requirements with a passion. Most I know do not want to deal with the mess. All of them must deal with it and need to make sure they have a competent treasurer. Many do not, and simply pass this along as just another volunteer job. Well, you get what you pay for then, and that can lead to bad press, fines, and trouble. One Livingston County candidate who lost his state rep election in 2004 owes thousands of dollars in fines. He still owes them. Failure to file.

I'm going to brag a bit here. Out of the eight organizations/committees I've treasured, I have never been fined, and have not had a fix-it since 2002. That's not because of luck. That's because I leave things airtight and don't leave openings for fines.

Mark Schauer Campaign Fined $6000

From the AP

LANSING, Mich. -- A campaign committee related to U.S. Rep. Mark Schauer says it will pay a $6,000 fine in a settlement with Michigan election officials over fundraising in 2006 state Senate races.

The Democrat from Battle Creek's state Senate campaign committee says it signed the agreement Friday. Michigan's Senate Democratic Fund political action committee will return $202,000 to Schauer's campaign and the money will be paid to the state.

The contribution was challenged by Senate Republicans in 2006. Republicans said Schauer's contribution to the political action committee exceeded the annual $20,000-per-person limit.

A Secretary of State spokeswoman said the state has not yet received the signed agreement or the money and won't consider the case closed until all parties sign off.

They replace Tim Walberg with this weasel?

Livingston County Election Developments

There are several stories in the Argus on this. First off, the Argus endorsed Bill Rogers and Donna Anderson in their primaries for the 66th District, and Cindy Denby in the 47th. Joe Hune also wrote a letter to the editor showing his support for Cindy, which is a break from his usual policy of not endorsing anybody in primary races. While it is not a shocker considering how long Cindy worked for Joe, it is significant as one of his opponents, Carl Konopaska, also mentioned that he interned at Joe's office.

The other shows the campaign finance race. Some of the candidates are going back and forth on this.

Aberasturi criticized Denby for accepting so much PAC money.

"I think that she's going to be needing to follow what the PACs ask her to do if she gets elected because she's accepting all their money," said Aberasturi, who ponied up $5,000 of his own money in his campaign. " I won't have any PACs I plan to follow. I think it's a waste ... to have spent all that money on mailings and stuff like that."

Denby rebuked the claims that she would "follow" PACs if elected, noting she has memberships with several organizations that donated to her campaign.

"No vote is for sale, and, at the end of the day, my approach to when I vote is what's best locally, for the community," Denby said. "At the state level, it would be first what is best for our district and, secondly, what is best for the state of Michigan."

The district covers Fowlerville, Howell, Pinckney and the townships of Hartland, Tyrone, Deerfield, Cohoctah, Conway, Handy, Howell, Iosco, Unadilla, Putnam and Hamburg.

Portelli defended the seriousness of what he called his "bare-bones campaign."

"I have campaigned — I have talked to as many people as I could," Portelli said. "Spending a lot of money on postcards and marketing, I've found to be quiet ineffective in the past, for business purposes."

Konopaska could not be reached for comment.

The words "Political Action Committee" (PAC) and "special interests" gets tossed around like it is a bad thing. They are very misunderstood by much of the public. Whether it is a good thing or a bad thing is dependent on every person's interest. A PAC is nothing more than a group of citizens which support an issue unite to get involved with the goal of electing candidates. PACs are also hard money and tightly regulated and in Michigan, have to submit reports if they raise $1000 or more. I've worked with PACs for years. The implication by some is that PAC's write a check to a candidate in order to get their vote. That is not the case in the PACs I've worked with. The PACs I've worked with want to support the candidates who already have those views. The one I'm now with doesn't write checks to candidates, nor did the last one I worked with. Those PACs educate voters and supporters about the stances of the candidates and need a PAC in order to endorse candidates. 2nd Amendment groups have PACS. Pro-Abortion and Pro-life groups have PACs. Taxpayers groups have PACS. Business and Labor have PACS.

Do I think Cindy will follow Farm Bureau? No. I think she agrees with much of Farm Bureau and is supported because of that. Same goes for Builders and Contractors and the Restaurant Organization (Smoking bill?). One candidate for rep in Farmington Hills, Richard Lerner, has a long list of PAC Surveys and questionaires and you can see most of the questions. He's not a fan of PAC's and ratted out those who sent him a survey by posting the questions. It's a good read and you can find where they stand on a lot of issues.

Speaking of campaign finance, the secretary of state's reports are out. In the 47th, Frank Portelli and Carl Konopaska are running low-budget campaigns and disclosed their reports despite being under the waiver wire (if chosen). Don't laugh at them, Joe Hune did not spend much money either, and neither do the Concerned Taxpayer's Group. Charlie Aberasturi (he's also treasurer) needs to get his report in unless it was sent in the mail and postmarked on time. The Democrat Scott Lucas and his treasurer also does not have his pre-primary. He may not have opposition in the primary, but his name is on the ballot and he is up for election in August as his name is on the ballot. He did not click the waiver wire. These are preventable mistakes where candidates hurt themselves for no good reason. Hopefully for both of them, it was sent in. If not, the fine clock is ticking.

On the 66th Race, from the Argus

Republicans Bill Rogers raised more than $27,000, and Jason Corosanite amassed almost $18,000 total. One-third of Rogers' money came from PACs, with the biggest contributions — $2,500 — coming from each the Michigan Beer and Wine Wholesalers and Michigan Chamber of Commerce.

Corosanite accepted no PAC money and said one can tell where a candidate's "loyalties are going to be" by the amount of such contributions.

Rogers refuted that claim, stating it's necessary to run a campaign and that Corosanite shouldn't complain since he is with the Michigan Association of Chiropractors.

"What's interesting is his focus, from what I've heard before with his experience in Lansing is working with his PAC — his chiropractor PAC — so I guess I'm a little confused with why PACs are so bad if he works with one."

Corosanite said he serves in an advocacy position with his association and neither accepts funds from nor donates to the political action committee.

"If anything, it's been eye-opening for me to see everything that's going on," Corosanite said.

"I catch a lot of grief because I don't contribute to their PAC."

Jason's right, and so is Bill. You can often tell loyalties by PAC contributions or endorsements. Not always, but it is a good indicator. The State Chamber contribution shows that Bill likely won't vote for a tax increase. A look at Jason's campaign report shows a lot of contributions, almost exclusively from chriopractors (which he is). That isn't a PAC, but really not much different that support from the "Chriopractors PAC."

Donna Anderson (also treasurer) needs to get her report in if it wasn't mailed in already. She hasn't filed and did not click the waiver wire. Tom Crawford clicked the waiver wire. Bill and Jason's reports are in.

Maybe the reports are in for Aberasturi, Lucan, and Anderson, but if they are, why make it look bad when they are not on the Sec of State site after the due date? It looks sloppy and looks like they aren't in. If they aren't in, then they got fines to pay.

UPDATE - Aberasturi turned in his report on time with a day to spare. It just was not posted on the secretary of state site. Apologies to Aberasturi for implying that he didn't turn it in.

Fieger found not guilty of campaign finance donations

I don't like Fieger at all, but it's not illegal to be a jackass. Do I agree with the verdict? I don't know since I wasn't there, but I predicted . These cases are very difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. I first commented on this case when charges were brought. Here

I wish I had the time to courtwatch this case. Fieger did a real smart thing when he was charged. He hired probably the best defense attorney in the entire country in Gerry Spence. Spence earned my respect for the way he handled the Randy Weaver case and railroading at Ruby Ridge. He did the impossible and got an aquittal there. If you are going to go up against Gerry Spence, your case needs to be perfect.

I have two biases here that compete against one another. I have anti-Fieger, but pro-defense leanings.

From the Free Press

Attorney Geoffrey Fieger won a dramatic acquittal Monday on federal charges of violating campaign-finance laws, saving his lucrative career and sending federal prosecutors in Detroit to yet another crushing defeat in a high-profile case.

and this

Helland disputed repeated claims by Fieger’s lawyers that bigwigs at the Justice Department in Washington targeted Fieger, a Democrat who rose to fame defending assisted-suicide physician Jack Kevorkian and ran unsuccessfully for governor in 1998.

Ordinarily, such cases are handled by the Federal Election Commission as a civil matter with fines.

Fieger and Johnson were accused of recruiting 64 employees, family members, friends and vendors to contribute $127,000 to the campaign of Edwards — who, like Fieger, made his fortune as a trial lawyer — and reimbursing the donors with law firm funds.
....
Ordinarily, such cases are handled by the Federal Election Commission as a civil matter with fines.

Fieger is no campaign finance saint and actually admitted to breaking the law with anyonomous donations in a PAC he formed under the name "Herb Charboneau" in a State Supreme Court race. His history there is not good. That would have been much easier to prove than this federal case. This is very, very difficult to prove.

What Fieger did was one of the oldest tricks in the book. He got his friends, workers, and others to donate to a candidate, since he could not go above the max. That's legal. If he reimbursed them specificaly for that donation, it wasn't. In a criminal case, it has to be proven as well that he knew it was not legal, and they need to prove that the reimbursement was specificaly for the transaction to the John Edwards campaign. That is not an easy thing to do beyond a reasonable doubt. The Detroit News has this gem of a quote

West Bloomfield labor attorney Lester Owczarski, a former state administrative law judge who sat through most of the trial, said prosecutors failed to present a case jurors could care about. "It was too much inside baseball ... this thing was just too technical," he said of the Fieger case.

Campaign finance law is extremely technical. It is technical to the point where most people break the law, and not even know it. Go to the Michigan Campaign Finance site and look up a random committee. If it doesn't have the $1000 waiver box checked, more than likely, you'll find something illegal there. The State is reasonable on that stuff and usually sends back "Errors/Omissions" notices, which is roughly equal to a "fix-it" ticket. Fix the problem and do it right, with no penalty outside of more work. Look how common those notices are. Look how common late filings are. Some forget to file. The federal laws are even more technical than the state laws.

I understand most of the campaign finance jargon because I've treasured campaigns for eight years, but unless you are an experienced treasurer or a hands on candidate who studies this, you will be overwhelmed. Even a lot of attorneys are overwhelmed by some of this stuff. If Spence got the jury to understand how technical and easy it is to break the law, that juror is going to be quite sympathetic to a defendant. Paint the prosecutors as bad guys like he did as well, and the juror can visualize that possibility in the back of their mind for a doubt. I don't think there were any campaign treasurers on that jury, as they would be disqualified immediately. The prosecution created a real tough draw for themselves with this because it such a difficult case to prove.

I wasn't there, but I don't think this was an open and shut case. Based on what I know on this, I can see a case made for a reasonable doubt. I'm not convinced Fieger is not guilty, but I'm not convinced that he was either beyond a reasonable doubt. I hate sending someone to prison on a technicality, even if I don't like him.

On a related matter, I'd like to see a revamp of the campaign finance laws. Full immediate disclosure, and unlimited donations by individuals. Everything then is out on the table and these games will not be played.

Major Campaign Treasury Problems with the GOP

I would have posted this one sooner, but I've been busy defending someone accused of tortious interference in a hypothetical case. That takes precidence over this blog. Sorry, folks. That's done, and one story recently has rocked the small circle of people known as political committee treasurers. I've been following this story for awhile. This scandal is not getting much press, but it pisses me off more than anything that Spitzer, Kwame, and Tom Athans has done. This isn't as flashy and doesn't deal with sex, gays, or hookers. It's simply old fashion skimming off the top. Embezzlement. I'll preface this by saying that everyone is innocent till proven guilty. I will also preface this by saying that Christopher J Ward is NOT Christopher C Ward, my state representative. It is a completely different person.

I've been a treasurer myself. I normally don't brag about myself on this blog as I like to let my actions do the talking, but on the state/local levels, I am one of the best at my work. Even those within the party that do not care for me all that much respect my work on treasurer and campaign finance issues. I consider myself one of the top 10 treasurers in the state. I have not screwed up on reports in six years, and when I did screw up, it was a "fix it" and not a fine. I've proven myself here enough where I don't treasure organizations for free anymore. You want my work, it costs, but at the same time I do very good work. There are a few treasurers who are better. Those are the people I call when I have a question.

One who probably is better at ability was Christopher J Ward, who I will refer to as CJ Ward to make sure there is no confusion with Chris here in Livingston County. CJ Ward was the treasurer for the NRCC, which is the house campaign committee. He also treasured other campaigns.

From the Wall Street Journal

WASHINGTON -- The House Republicans' campaign committee, already strapped for cash going into the 2008 election, said yesterday that it is missing several hundred thousand dollars, and possibly more, after discovering suspected fraudulent activity by its former treasurer.

The National Republican Congressional Committee, which helps elect Republicans to the House, dismissed its longtime treasurer, Christopher Ward, Jan. 28 after it said it discovered he had been submitting bogus financial audits of the committee's accounts since 2002.

The committee previously said it had notified the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the false audits, and that it was cooperating with the FBI's criminal investigation.

The NRCC yesterday gave new information about the potential scope of the fraud. Mr. Ward apparently made unauthorized wire transfers totaling "several hundred thousand dollars" from NRCC accounts into other Republican campaign committees that he also managed as treasurer, said NRCC lawyer, Robert Kelner of the law firm Covington & Burling LLP. Mr. Kelner said that Mr. Ward then apparently made wire transfers from those outside Republican accounts into his own personal and business bank accounts. The NRCC has traced such activity back to 2004, but its investigation is continuing, he said.

"The evidence we have today indicates we have been deceived and betrayed for a number of years by a highly respected and trusted individual," Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma, the NRCC chairman, said in a statement.

If he's guilty, lock him up. I really hope he's innocent, but from what I have heard, I'll just say his attorney had a tough job to do.

The Argus has its own story on this with our congressman Mike Rogers. I believe Mike here, and I'll explain why.

When Rogers was finance chairman of the National Republican Campaign Committee, its treasurer was Christopher J. Ward (no relation to state Rep. Chris Ward, R-Genoa Township). The NRCC has accused Ward of misappropriating potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars from the committee, whose goal is to raise money to elect Republicans to the House of Representatives.

Rogers said the fundraising and operations functions were separate at the NRCC, so he didn't work directly with Ward and didn't know him.

"My job as finance chair was to raise money for the NRCC. The operations and expenditure sides are separate," he said. "Obviously, it's disappointing. We worked awful hard on our end of the shop."

I am certain Congressman Mike is telling the truth here. I'm sure he trusted CJ Ward to take care of it. Nobody gets one of the top 2-3 treasury jobs in the country without being trusted. I'd say the same thing here, even if it was Granholm. I know enough politicians to know their attitudes on campaign finance related matters. I have enough treasury experience as well to know the attitudes. Even those with a strong interest in the matter, like my rep Chris Ward (Livingston County) don't like dealing with the filings. Politicians HATE this part of the job in a way that most people do not believe. It's about as popular as a root canal or a conservative in Ann Arbor. They do not want to deal with the tricky filings and would rather spend their time campaigning. That's why committees have treasurers, so they do not have to deal with it. "Give my donation to the treasurer over there. He'll take care of it. Thank you." is not an uncommon saying at fundraisers. Some pols do not even see the money. They have no desire to see it, and do not want to deal with it. Most pols have a very irritated look on their face when the words "Campaign finance" are mentioned next to each other.

That gets to my next point. Most treasurers in my experience are given blind trust with the campaign funds. They are not checked up on and scrutinized by the pols. I wasn't checked up on, except by one organization (probably two today with the precedent I helped set). I could have skimmed off the top, like CJ Ward was accused of, and have gotten away with it if I tried in all but one organization. One org had a chair who scrutinized financial transactions as much as I do, so both of us kept detailed records on filings and transactions. I'm not that kind of a person, but I'm explaining how easy it is to people here, largely due to politicians, board members, corporate chairs, corporate presidents, and corporate vice presidents, not wanting to deal with these tedious, boring, and difficult matters. They often give blind trust in treasurers. This is why I'm a complete a-hole about these types of matters. One major treasury scandal is enough.

I close with this advice. An organization's treasurer should be the most trustworthy person in the organization, and one of the most competent in the organization. After that, "Trust but Verify," as President Reagan would say. Proper checks and balances prevent situations like this. If the NRCC admins did this, we wouldn't have this. Prior planning prevents piss poor performance.

Interesting News story on Campaign Finance

The Detroit News has a very interesting story, particulary for guys like me who follow the stuff in politics that nobody likes to follow - campaign finance. If you are a candidate in either party, this is a must read.

Brett McRae is always cleaning up after politicians.

When he was a student, he worked his way through law school as a janitor at the state House of Representatives. Now as a campaign finance consultant, the 50-year-old Charlotte man keeps elections clean.

"A person's political reputation can really be trashed by things that can be found in those filings," said McRae, "like if you were late or made a questionable expenditure or took money from someone you shouldn't have."

I don't belong to the same political party as McRae, but he's earned my respect. Guys like McRae, and his Republican counterpart at state party (who has stayed there through several chairs for obvious reasons), are the type of people that each candidate needs to talk to. Why? I'll let him say it.

"For a lot of campaigns, the financial reporting gets shuffled to the bottom of the deck," he said, even though late fees and penalties can be costly and mistakes can be politically embarrassing. "This way, the staff can concentrate on winning the election."

The worst campaign finance debacle I've seen was this, almost two years ago which I covered under. Why a good treasurer is a must. I sat on that information for two years before it was picked up by the papers. I didn't turn him in, since the state automaticly catched those who don't. The only people I told were Joe Hune's campaign who kept it quiet since there was no reason to attack. Joe was winning big, and his opponent was not running a credible campaign. I could have called the paper then, but I actually felt sorry for the guy. I don't think he knew what he was getting into.

Most candidates, of all parties, are completely ignorant when it comes to campaign finance matters. I do not mean that as an insult. Most just don't know all of the ins and outs of it. Like the candidates, I was baptized by fire when I was volunteered at 22 years old to be a PAC treasurer. I thought it was something easy. I didn't know what I was getting into. At the same time, it was one of the best things to happen to me. Today, I'm a veteran at this stuff, one of the go to guys in the party on this, and hopefully taught a few people some things as well. I'm proud of two things with my campaign finance work. I've never been fined for an error. That means I did not have any failure to files, or any late filings (nor indictments or convictions). I have not had an error or omissions notice in five years (mistakes since corrected). I still have a lot to learn, especially on federal matters, but I don't make many mistakes outside of being a little too cautious at times. I don't play games with this stuff.

I can also catch a lot of errors as well, and turned the MEA in for non-disclosure. I don't turn in everyone, even in the opposing party, but they knew better and I thought their non-disclosure was deliberate since they did not want their cards saying "East Lansing" on them.

In campaigns there are two things. There are things you can contol, and things you can't control. Campaign finance situations are things that can be controlled. THE most important thing a candidate can do is hire or get a good treasurer to volunteer for the campaign.

Michigan has full disclosure. That's something that is very important to know. There are a few people whose money I will stay the hell away from if I am running for political office. I will have a lot of explaining to do if I report donations from people like Mark Foley (obvious reasons), Josh Sugarmann (for anti-2nd Amendment views), or illegal sources. (Corporations, foreigners). Good Treasurers can screen this, and that goes double on the illegal sources.

For those interesting in running or forming PAC's, there are manuals on campaign finance laws at the Elections Division of the Secretary of State's office. Click Here for Sec of State That is a must read if you are interesting in running.

If you run, know what you are getting into on this stuff and be prepared. All it takes is one major screw up to destroy the entire campaign. As the old saying goes, "Prior planning prevents poor performance."

Fieger charged with campaign finance violations

The only democrat in recent memory who actually lost Ann Arbor is back in the news over his political donations to John "Hair" Edwards.
From the Oakland Press:

Attorney Geoffrey Fieger used "straw donors" to illegally funnel $127,000 to the presidential campaign of John Edwards in 2003 and 2004, a 10-count indictment alleges.

Fieger and his law partner, Vernon Johnson, 45, were named in the grand jury indictment that was unsealed Friday in Detroit.

Fieger, 56, best known for defending assisted-suicide advocate Jack Kevorkian, said the charges were politically motivated and "solely intended to intimidate Democratic supporters around the country."

(snip)

The justice department alleges Fieger and Johnson skirted the $2,000 individual contribution limit by soliciting others to make contributions to Edwards and either providing the funds or reimbursing the donors for their contributions.

The donors included attorneys and spouses of Fieger's law firm, non-attorney employees and spouses at the law firm, Fieger's friends and third-party vendors to the law firm, according to the indictment.

The indictment also alleges Fieger obstructed justice by concealing information or providing false information to the grand jury. The government alleges Fieger told federal agents a deceased member of the law firm was responsible for the campaign contributions.

First, let's remember that he IS innocent till proven guilty. We can't arrest someone for being a prick. That isn't a crime.

That said, it isn't the first time he's been involved in campaign finance shenanagans. There was a bunch of anyonomous PAC funnelling that was orchastrated by Fieger in a recent state Supreme Court race. The left hates strict constructionists and originalist judges, and Fieger was a leader in the attempt to take them out election time, but did not want his name attached to it for obvious reasons.

On the state level, what he was charged with is called earmarking. It is a VERY COMMON, but ILLEGAL practice at both the state and federal level. In Gubenatorial Races, the donation limit is $3400. Let's say that John Doe runs for governor. I can give Doe $3400 if I had that kind of money. Anything more would be illegal. What often happens is that a donor will give money to an individual "earmarking" it to be given to a campaign. That's illegal and what Fieger is charged with. If I wanted to give $34,000 to Doe, I couldn't give $3400, and give $3400 to nine of my collegues with the stipulation that it goes to Doe's campaign. That's illegal, although as I said before - an extremely common practice (and tough to prove).

Is he guilty here? I'll let the jury decide that. I will say one thing. If he's guilty, he's by far not the only one. That I can say for a fact. A lot of people should be scared right now. Luckily for me, I don't earmark, and I stayed the hell away from that in campaigns I treasured.

Complaint filed against MEA for illegal mailing

Back on April 27 I broke the story about East Lansing's MEA breaking the law in their illegal campaign contributions. The Argus on May 2 confirmed the illegalities by the MEA.

The campaign finance laws are tricky in some respects. Other parts are basic and no brainers. Now, the MEA's PAC is an elite campaigning organization. They know all the tricks. This one was a no brainer. I think everyone knows that all the campaign advertisements to the public need to disclose the committee which paid for them, as well as the address of that committee.

MEA-PAC made the decision to mail out illegal independent expenditures in support of their two candidates, Dan Fondriest and Ed Literski. On their expenditure, they did not mention they were from East Lansing, nor did they disclose who paid for those advertisements. It was a shady move, and thanks to a few watchful eyes, they got caught.

This is an open and shut case. As such, I did the proper thing and filed a formal complaint with the bureau of elections against the East Lansing based MEA PAC. This complaint was strictly my work and not the work of any organization officially, nor unofficially. If this was a oversight missing just the "Paid for by" message, I'd let it go. If it just missed a return address, I'd let it go. Missing both is flat out unacceptable. Maybe a $1000 fine will send a message.