You can find Politico’s coverage in “Super PACs go stealth through first contests” by Dave Levinthal and Kenneth P. Vogel.

According to the article, some in the Federal Election Commission are calling for a change of the rules to allow for greater disclosure:

The disclosure rules may need to be updated to reflect the rise of super PACs as driving forces in presidential politics, two Democratic FEC commissioners suggested in interviews with POLITICO. “Super PACs are functioning as the alter egos of the campaigns, and their activity was clearly not anticipated when the statutes were put in place,” said Ellen Weintraub, a Democratic FEC appointee. The commission, she said, “should reconsider the regulations about caucuses and disclosure or at least take a hard look at them.”

The 6 member Federal Election Commission, split equally along partisan lines, is often seen “hanging each other out to dry”.

In an article posted on Politico, Republican member of the FEC, Don McGahn states, “These public spats we have are very, very healthy. It’s a healthy ugly.” McGahn himself tore pages of regulations out of a book during a hearing, letting the scraps fall in order to prove a point to his Democratic colleagues whom he accused of disregarding their own rules.

With court decisions such as Citizens United v. The Federal Election Commission, the FEC has had more trouble than ever making decisions regarding campaign finance, and leaving politicians and their benefactors unsure what regulations they have to follow.

During the upcoming election season, the members of the FEC will have to set aside their differences so that they may set concrete campaign finance guidelines for the United States.

To read more, read FEC dysfunction not just politics, it’s personal by Dave Levinthal and Robin Bravender.

The agenda for the today’s FEC open meeting can be found here.

Thank you to Eric Brown’s Political Activity Law Blog for giving everyone this alert.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) has issued an advisory opinion approving plans of a for-profit company’s mobile-based financial processing platform to collect and distribute funds to candidates, committees, and PACs.

GivingSphere, which allows individuals to make donations to charitable groups through the internet and mobile devices, requested an opinion about implementing contributions to political entities. Customer funds for contributions are accumulated by rebates earned by purchasing goods from merchants who participate in the GivingSphere affiliate program.

Advisory Opinion 2011-19 allows GivingSphere to transmit its customers’ funds in the form of political contributions. Additionally, the company may sell advertising space to political committees on its website, provide a searchable database of political committees to its customers, and permit political committees to post a ‘badge’ of the GivingSphere on their website.

Because GivingSphere is merely processing contributions, it will not be subject to any reporting requirements. The FEC press release can be found here.

The Federal Election Commission has received an advisory opinion request asking if an independent expenditure-only PAC may use incumbent members of congress in its advertisements.

Independent expenditure PAC American Crossroads has formally requested it be allowed to produce and distribute television and radio advertisements featuring on camera footage or voice-overs of incumbent members of congress up for re-election. Conceding the purpose of the ads would be to improve the public’s perception of the congress member, the advertisements would focus on policy and legislative issues.

American Crossroads is seeking confirmation and guidance as to whether the advertisements qualify as coordinated communications, are in-kind contributions, or may limit the PAC’s ability to independently expend funds in favor of the candidate.

The advisory opinion request can be found here.

Politico published “FEC can’t explain secrecy” by Dave Levinthal.

The Hill posted “Lawmakers demand FEC documents, threaten subpoena” by Debbie Siegelbaum and Kevin Bogardus.

The FEC provided this press release and the text of the joint statement delivered to the oversight hearing.

The Boston Globe’s Political Intelligence just published this article, “Transparency groups lash out at FEC, Obama” by Donovan Slack.

Here are some of the questions the article raises: “… [C]an foreign companies with some US operations legally contribute to US elections? In the past, foreign citizens and companies have been barred from spending money in the American political system. Also unanswered: Should American organizations who spend money to influence elections have to disclose the source of the money?”

Bruce Watson offers an opinion piece called “Really Want to Influence Politicians? Stop Donating to Campaigns” on AOL’s Daily Finance page. Watson puts particular focus on the increase in fundraising by the members of the Super Committee. He references a recent study by the Project On Government Oversight. As we recall, Politico offered a bit of a different view with “Supercommittee panelists don’t cash in” by Abby Phillip.

Individuals with federal contracts should be allowed to make political contributions to federal candidates or political parties, a lawsuit filed yesterday by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argues.

The suit, Wagner v. Federal Election Commission, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, challenges the constitutionality of section 441c of Title 2 of the U.S. Code, which prohibits any vendors with contracts with the federal government from making such contributions.

According to its press release, the ACLU is asking the Court, on behalf of the three named plaintiffs, to declare the law unconstitutional as applied to individuals who have personal services contracts with federal agencies. Because federal workers who are not contractors may make federal political contributions, while contractors performing the same work may not, the suit argues section 441c violates both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and the First Amendment.

Photo of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia courtesy of the Court’s website.

Today’s scheduled House Subcommittee hearing with the FEC’s Commissioners has been postponed.

The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Elections has not yet chosen a new date for the hearing.

All six Commissioners from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) are slated to appear before a House Subcommittee tomorrow at 3pm.

The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Elections has designated the scheduled meeting “Federal Election Commission: Reviewing Policies, Processes and Procedures.”

Among its other election-related duties, the Subcommittee on Elections oversees the FEC.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) will no longer prohibit nonconnected political committees from accepting corporate and labor organization contributions, provided the political committee maintains and deposits those contributions into separate bank accounts.

The Commission will also not limit the amounts permissible sources can contribute to such accounts.

In an statement released by the FEC, it stated, consistent with its agreement to a stipulated order and consent judgment in Carey v. FEC, it would no longer enforce 2 U.S.C. §§ 441a(a)(1)(C) and 441a(a)(3), as well as any implementing regulations, against any nonconnected political committee with regard to contributions from individuals, political committees, corporations, and labor organizations under certain conditions.

A single committee may now contribute directly to candidates and political committees, and make independent expenditures, separating the funds only by using two separate bank accounts. The committee must maintain the statutory limits on the solicitation of funds used for direct contributions while it may simultaneously seek unlimited funds for use in their independent expenditures.

The FEC intends to develop new regulations and amend its reporting forms. Until that time, the Commission says committees should follow the procedures the FEC outlines in its current statement, which is located here.

This post follows up  previous articles by George Ticoras, “FEC Agrees Not to Enforce Some Laws Against NDPAC” and “One PAC Is Enough.”

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) issued an Advisory Opinion stating a “project” created by a trade association may make certain communications to the general public asking individuals to contribute directly to particular federal candidates.

The Utah Bankers Association (U.B.A.) had requested the Advisory Opinion. It intends to solicit the general public through its website and e-mail, as well as through the website of “Friends of Traditional Banking,” a project created for this purpose. There will be no coordination with any candidate and no contributions will be accepted or forwarded to federal candidate’s committees.

In Advisory Opinion 2011-14, the Commission concluded the expenses for soliciting contributions through a trade association’s own website and e-mail is not an in-kind contribution because an internet communication is not a “public communication” if it “is not placed for a fee on another person’s website,” and therefore does not meet the content prong test of coordinated communications. The Commission also found U.B.A.’s plan is not “electioneering communications” which are limited to broadcast, cable, or satellite communications

Other questions related to the U.B.A. request were also addressed in the opinion.

The Federal Election Commission has entered into a Stipulated Order and Consent Judgment with the National Defense PAC (NDPAC) agreeing not to enforce some provisions of law regarding contribution limits for political committees and candidates.

These provisions, 2 U.S.C. §§ 441a(a)(1)(c) and 441a(a)(3), were ruled unenforceable by the District Court in a prior decision, Carey v. FEC. Prior to the District Court’s decision, the FEC had been unable to issue a binding resolution for an earlier NDPAC advisory opinion request.

As a single committee, the NDPAC may now contribute directly to candidates and political committees, and make independent expenditures, separating the funds only by using two separate bank accounts. It must maintain the statutory limits on the solicitation of funds used for direct contributions while it may simultaneously seek unlimited funds for use in their independent expenditures. While the Stipulated Order and Consent Judgment specifically regards the FEC withholding enforcement of the law as it applies to NDPAC, it does not address other PACs utilizing the same procedures for solicitation and separation of funds.

This post updates a previous article by George Ticoras, “One PAC is Enough” from June 15, 2011.

An advisory opinion request seeking to lift the requirement of the 24- and 48-hour reporting of independent expenditures for bulk e-mailing during the 2012 presidential primaries has been filed with the Federal Election Commission.

Western Representation PAC (WRPAC), which has 140,000 e-mail addresses, and estimates it will have 500,000 by the end of the year, intends to send the entire list an indeterminate number of e-mail messages during the more than 24 president primaries in 2012. The frequency of messages would range “from as few as four a month to as many as thirty, depending on the unpredictable political developments of the day and the fluctuating urgencies of the primary season.”

Because WRPAC will be paying a fixed monthly price for the e-mail service, and because the number of e-mails is unpredictable, WRPAC is asking the FEC to grant an exemption from the 24- and 48-hour reporting requirement, stressing the difficulty in determining what share of the fixed monthly price would apply in order to determine whether a reporting requirement would be triggered across the various different primary dates. WRPAC’s request includes several scenarios to illustrate the burdens on WRPAC’s planned independent expenditures, arguing “that they rise to the level of an infringement on WRPAC’s First Amendment rights.”

You can find the press release here.