Federal Election Commission fines Sanders-affiliated PAC

[DonViejo]

Federal Election Commission fines Sanders-affiliated PAC

Source: ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Federal Election Commission has fined a political action committee associated with Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders for missing financial reporting deadlines.

The Vermont Press Bureau reports that the FEC in December sent a letter to the Progressive Voters of America Leadership PAC warning about the missed deadlines.

The PAC’s treasurer responded in May by acknowledging it had neglected to file the reports, calling the lapse “an inadvertent mistake.” The PAC paid $7,690 in fines to the FEC. The press bureau obtained copies of the correspondence, which it reprinted on its website. Sanders represent Vermont in the U.S. Senate.

The Center for Responsive Politics says the Progressive PAC raised $535,000 and spent $405,000 during the 2013-14 election cycle.

###

http://www.salon.com/2015/07/03/federal_election_commission_fines_sanders_affiliated_pac/

[fredamae]

1. Huh?

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/us/politics/fec-cant-curb-2016-election-abuse-commission-chief-says.html?_r=0

[99Forever]

39. It's called selective enforcement.

Apparently the laws only apply to those that don't kiss Wall Street's ass.

[Duckhunter935]

45. Yep, Bush and Clinton

PACS will have much more latitude and not be prosecuted for anything

[fredamae]

60. Mmmmhmmm

interesting. I mean the FEC Spokeswoman was Quite clear about the agency refusing to preform min job duties for monitoring and enforcement, as I understood the agency rep.
Could this lead to a Lawsuit in the same way Tea Party Sued IRS for discrimination?
"We" need to Raise Holy Hell Over This bs.

[99Forever]

61. I agree.

However, I have no idea how it could be done. Maybe there is a member who has that knowledge and could share it.

[BainsBane]

70. What evidence do you have other pacs didn't file the required paperwork?

[99Forever]

71. Read the damn link.

This is a discussion forum not a freakin' courtroom.

[BainsBane]

81. I did read the link

Your claim is that it is selective enforcement, with absolutely no evidence. This isn't about any investigation. All the FEC does if check to see if paperwork is filed by last week's deadline. What is clear is that you have decided to make excuses because campaign finance law suddenly isn't relevant when a PAC for someone you have decided should be president doesn't follow it. I find it interesting to discover principle means absolutely nothing compared to the career of a great man. The problem with a view of politics that puts the careers of members of the political elite above the people and issues is some contort themselves into pretzels in order to justify anything. Well, at least we finally know the discourse about corporatism is mere pretense. If following the already scandalously lax campaign finance laws doesn't matter, nothing does.

[99Forever]

83. ...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251425179

[Duckhunter935]

2. Does Bernie have any control over this?

or are you just posting this to try and smear Bernie with something he has no control over.

Nice try but fail

[marble falls]

3. Its a smear. This is a PAC that raised a half million and spent 80% of it. Seriously.....

this is a little PAC run by amateurs. This PAC is a "1%er": it exists in the smallest 1% of PACs. When a GOPer drops a PAC this small on the ground, he won't even stoop to pick it up.

Hillary Clinton doesn't even have a PAC this small. Steven Colbert's PAC was almost twice as big as this PAC.

[Duckhunter935]

5. I know

and the Hillary people do not smear on DU



They complain very loudly when you do not agree with her evolving positions

[marble falls]

8. It would never, ever happen! Smear Bernie? Heaven forbid!.....

They don't like us going off the coronation script.

At worst Bernie will make Hillary "evolve" a little more in a liberal direction.

[-none]

54. And then, after the elections she will snap back to her normal political positions.

[Duckhunter935]

57. I fear so

[DonViejo]

4. I post news articles objectively, without regard to which candidate they are about...

don't like it? Put me on ignore so you never ever have to read any article about anything that I post. Nice try at smearing me but BIG time fail for you.

[Duckhunter935]

6. Good for you

I will be looking for similar stories on Hillary. Here are a couple I found after a quick look.
Clinton May Be Older But She Still Has Younger Voters
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251404376
Hillary Clinton and the 2016 Democrats: Mostly Liberal, Together
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251395625
Clinton Starts Running Against the GOP Congress
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251399592

At least most of your posts are against the republicans. I see not one positive story about a democratic candidate other than Hillary though.


Have a great day and a wonderful fourth of July holiday

[marble falls]

10. Whatever you do, don't hold your breath.

[Duckhunter935]

12. I know check the edit

proves what I said was true and what the poster said.....

[marble falls]

17. don viejo is a good and interesting poster - but not when it comes to Hillary Clinton.

[Duckhunter935]

24. Yes he is

and a majority of the postings are indeed informative. He just needs to admit the bias in the posting for Hillary and against Bernie.

[madokie]

31. Yes Search is our friend

separates the chaff from the kernel

[Raine1967]

79. I know you do, Don.

I find it very interesting that so many Sanders supporters were outraged that a pro-O'MAlley pac said something not pleasing about Bernie.

They were the very first to ask O'Malley to denounce that PAC — http://www.democraticunderground.com/128018513 (and he did in the most legal way he could, here is another link: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251423415)

I am not seeing the same denouncement (of a poorly run PAC) here that was asked of Martin O'MAlley.

In all fairness, this is not Sanders fault. The same exact way it wasn't O'Malley's fault.

It's not a smear, it is a factual thing.

[elleng]

80. Thanks, Raine. GOOD to stick with facts and law.

[MADem]

28. Sanders has as much control over "Bernie" PACS as Hillary has over Clinton PACS.

These entities operate separately from the candidate and there is no coordination.

It's not nice to "smear" any candidate with something they have no control over.

[Duckhunter935]

30. I agree

[Agschmid]

77. Yup.

[frazzled]

59. Yes, apparently so: it's a "Leadership PAC"

A leadership PAC is a political action committee that can be established by current and former members of Congress as well as other prominent political figures.

Leadership PACs provide a way for candidates to fund their travel, office expenses, consultants, polling and other non-campaign expenses. Leadership PACs are also used to fund other candidates' campaigns, usually new candidates or threatened incumbents. Politicians often use their PACs to donate to other candidates because they are considering seeking a leadership position in Congress, a higher office, or leverage within their own party as they show off their fund-raising ability.

http://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=q03

From Vermont's Rutland Herald:

Documents obtained by the Vermont Press Bureau show that the Progressive Voters of America Leadership PAC, a so-called leadership committee that current and former members of Congress are allowed to create, paid about $8,000 in administrative fines in May. The FEC levies fines when a committee fails to file required reports or files them late.

...

The Burlington-based committee’s treasurer, Phil Fiermonte, a longtime Sanders aide and currently the field director for Sanders’ presidential campaign, received a letter from the FEC in December warning that the committee may have failed to file required financial reports.

Fiermonte wrote to FEC Chairwoman Ann Ravel on May 5 acknowledging the committee, which appears to have been founded in 2004, had in fact missed reporting deadlines.

“We acknowledge that we neglected to file the 12 day Pre-General Report of Receipts and Disbursements and the 30 day Post-General Report of Receipts and Disbursements before the filing deadlines and have enclosed checks to pay for each of the administrative fines for these infractions,” Fiermonte wrote.

“This was an inadvertent mistake. As you know, we have since filed both reports with the FEC,” he added. “We will make certain to be diligent to comply with all filing deadlines in the future.”

The letter included two separate checks, one for $1,090 and another for $6,600.

http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20150704/THISJUSTIN/707049929

I don't know that this is a big deal. But in presidential politics, everything is a big deal. You do have to follow the rules for reporting to the FEC by the established quarterly deadlines; fines are automatic. The fines were paid. I'm sure it happens. It is not, however, untoward to ask about the professionalism of the staff and the campaign when this sort of thing happens.

[jwirr]

67. He is not supposed to have any control over his PAC. That is a law. One that is ignored by some

candidates but apparently not by Bernie. In the past this has been a problem for our candidates as the Rs do not like the law.

[Recursion]

82. No, it's a leadership PAC

His campaign can control it but can only use the money for certain administrative expenses.

[Sheepshank]

84. How is this a smear?

Posting facts, and and article link. Whe you don't like the comment it's a smear? Good lord, you gotta get a thicker skin.

[hrmjustin]

7. How dare you post news thst is not flattering to Sanders.

[MoonRiver]

9. Ought to be a federal crime!

[hrmjustin]

11. Capital punishment damn it! How dare he do such a thing!

[MoonRiver]

13. Yeah, off with their heads!

[Iliyah]

49. LOL

[MADem]

78. Sure seems like it here at DU!

Some people post like primary season will never end!

Some of these insults--for the crime of not supporting a barely-known candidate-- will reverberate down the years, I think....

[Duckhunter935]

14. Does Bernie control them?

guilty right?

[hrmjustin]

15. I have no idea but it is a news story and your response is priceless.

[Duckhunter935]

21. the law says no

no coordination. I would think you would know that. With the hundreds of millions of PAC money that Hillary will have helping her, I hope you are as vocal when the problems show up with them.

The Secret World of a Well-Paid ‘Donor Adviser’ in Politics
A constellation of left-leaning nonprofits and “super PACs” are raising tens of millions of dollars to pave the way for Hillary Rodham Clinton’s presidential campaign — and nearly all of them have paid Mary Pat Bonner a cut.

Over the past several years, the groups, which include American Bridge 21st Century, Media Matters for America and the super PAC Ready for Hillary, have paid Ms. Bonner’s consulting firm in excess of $6 million to help them cultivate wealthy donors and raise money, according to tax filings and campaign disclosures.

Ms. Bonner’s contracts give her firm a commission, typically 12.5 percent, on any money she brings in. Her tenacity, ties to wealthy givers and mastery of making donors happy have made Ms. Bonner, 48, among the most successful practitioners of a trade that is virtually invisible to voters but has taken on immense power and influence in the post-Citizens United world.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/06/us/in-invisible-world-of-political-donor-advisers-a-highly-visible-player.html

The list says it all to me

Clinton, have to love the big banks!

Citigroup Inc $782,327 $774,327 $8,000
Goldman Sachs $711,490 $701,490 $10,000
DLA Piper $628,030 $601,030 $27,000
JPMorgan Chase & Co $620,919 $617,919 $3,000
EMILY's List $605,174 $601,254 $3,920
Morgan Stanley $543,065 $538,065 $5,000
Time Warner $411,296 $386,296 $25,000
Skadden, Arps et al $406,640 $402,140 $4,500
Lehman Brothers $362,853 $359,853 $3,000
Cablevision Systems $336,288 $306,900 $29,388
University of California $329,673 $329,673 $0
Kirkland & Ellis $311,441 $294,441 $17,000
Squire Patton Boggs $310,596 $305,158 $5,438
21st Century Fox $302,400 $302,400 $0
National Amusements Inc $297,534 $294,534 $3,000
Ernst & Young $297,142 $277,142 $20,000
Merrill Lynch $292,303 $286,303 $6,000
Credit Suisse Group $290,600 $280,600 $10,000
Corning Inc $274,700 $256,700 $18,000
Greenberg Traurig LLP $273,550 $265,450 $8,100


Bernie, good for the unions!!!

Machinists/Aerospace Workers Union $105,000 $0 $105,000
Teamsters Union $93,700 $700 $93,000
National Education Assn $84,350 $3,350 $81,000
United Auto Workers $79,650 $750 $78,900
United Food & Commercial Workers Union $72,500 $0 $72,500
Communications Workers of America $68,000 $1,500 $66,500
Laborers Union $64,000 $0 $64,000
Carpenters & Joiners Union $62,000 $0 $62,000
National Assn of Letter Carriers $61,000 $0 $61,000
American Assn for Justice $60,500 $500 $60,000
American Fedn of St/Cnty/Munic Employees $58,198 $1,200 $56,998
Intl Brotherhood of Electrical Workers $53,000 $0 $53,000
United Transportation Union $48,500 $0 $48,500
Sheet Metal Workers Union $47,000 $0 $47,000
Operating Engineers Union $46,100 $0 $46,100
Service Employees International Union $43,764 $5,500 $38,264
UNITE HERE $42,875 $3,250 $39,625
United Steelworkers $41,750 $750 $41,000
American Postal Workers Union $37,700 $0 $37,700
Plumbers/Pipefitters Union $36,000 $0 $36,000

[hrmjustin]

22. Yet here you are complaining about a poster posting a news story which is on topic.

If this was Hillary the Sanders people here would pounce.

[Duckhunter935]

33. I doubt it

It seems to be the smears come from one side and the Bernie side has policy and position problems. My problem is with her war votes, her wall street ties, her very recent EVOLVING that may or may not be her real positions and might evolve again.

But I do seed that you are very gleeful and can not admit that Bernie has no control over a PAC.

[hrmjustin]

35. Yes you guys are pure of heart and we are just hear to disrupt.

Good day and good bye.

Ps i know he is a great guy and would obey the rules but we are allowed to post ops without Sanders suppkrters permission.

Taks care.

[Duckhunter935]

37. yep, you are

My last question to you and I will go away

Do you admit that Bernie has no control over this PAC?

[Sheepshank]

64. Of course they would pounce if this were Hillary news

There is a core group that make sure they represent the anti Hillary crowd on every single thread that can be turned into Hillary hit rhetoric...look above it's already happened on this thread. Let's not pretend otherwise.

[frazzled]

65. This wasn't an outside PAC; it was his own Congressional "Leadership PAC"

See my documentation in reply #59 above.

Please don't try to make this about other candidates. It's just a fact, and it may not even be a big story. But you can't just ignore or make up facts.

[Iliyah]

51. Response

Smear for thee.

[MoonRiver]

16. Probably not. But the OP doesn't claim that. n/t

[marble falls]

18. No he didn't. He implied it. Smears are implied.

[hrmjustin]

19. How did he imply it? Be specific.

[Duckhunter935]

23. acually the poorly

written news story headline implied it. The OP reposted that headline with the intent. As I have pointed out the OP has not posted one story favorable to Bernie but has several to Hillary. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure it out.

[hrmjustin]

25. How dare he support Hillary. He shoukd be so ashamed.

And how dare he post a current news story. I tell you people can be so cruel.

[Duckhunter935]

26. The problem is he failed to admit it

he said he has no bias, unfortunately that is just not true. Nothing stops him from posting a news story and nothing prevents us from calling out the smear and bias either, right?

I guess we should not be allowed to make comments, right?

[hrmjustin]

27. .

[Duckhunter935]

29. I take that is saying we should not be allowed to post

OK




I am so glad Hillary recently evolved and you are able to use the rainbow H
Bernie has been there for a long time

The day after the Supreme Court ruled same-sex marriage a constitutional right, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) assured an audience in Nashua, N.H., Saturday morning that he's no newcomer to gay rights.

Sanders' evidence? His 1996 vote against the Defense of Marriage Act, which defined marriage as "a legal union between one man and one woman" and allowed states to refuse to recognize gay marriages performed elsewhere. The bill was signed into law by President Bill Clinton, husband of Sanders' rival for the Democratic nomination, Hillary Clinton.

"Back in 1996, that was a tough vote," Sanders told his audience, according toThe Hill. "Not too many people voted against it, but I did."

http://www.sanders.senate.gov/newsroom/must-read/32-years-before-scotus-decision-sanders-backed-gay-pride-march

[hrmjustin]

32. Lol yeah like i have any power here.

[Duckhunter935]

34. I know it kills you

that your host powers do not work here.

[hrmjustin]

36. Afyi i resigned 3 of the 4 rooms i host and i may resign the 4th soon.

Not that i care for your disdain for me but i just don't give a damn anymote.

Good day to you.

[Duckhunter935]

38. I have no disdain for you

I do not know where you got that from. It just seems like you do not care to be challenged on anything with Hillary and the outright near hatred for Bernie supporters.

I too hope you have a great weekend!!

[hrmjustin]

41. Then why did you say yes you are to me in the apother thread when i said this tongue and cheek;

Yes you guys are pure of heart and we are just hear to disrupt.

http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=424569

http://election.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=424578


Your disdain is clear.

And yes i can take criticism because i have my own disagreements with Hillary.i actually got off my ass to protest her.

[Duckhunter935]

42. I guess we will just have to

leave it at that.

I would have said something like this in answer

Do you admit that Bernie has no control over this PAC?

Agreed he has no control over what the PAC does and how it reports. I would not tie the PAC to the candidate if they have no control.

To bad you did not do that, makes me sad. So what did you protest about Hillary? Seems to me you are a ginormous supported of her.

[hrmjustin]

44. What makes me sad is how you jumped on the op for posting this.

Yes Sanders has no control over it but it is still a story.

I protested the iraq war.

[Duckhunter935]

46. "I protested the iraq war."

Good and so have many of us.

I jumped on the OP for showing open bias that he even now fails to admit and simply pointed out that Bernie has no control over a PAC.

It looks like that should not be allowed to be posted from some here.

Posting a news story that is not favorable to Bernie and the republicans but posting many that are favorable to Hillary, mmmmmmmmmmm, makes you think.

[hrmjustin]

48. Do you jump on Sanders supporters for showing open bias or is this just reserved for Clinton

supporters?

[Duckhunter935]

50. If I see an attempt to smeer

like this one, I would surely bring it up. What I tend to see is more disagreement over issues or the EVOLVING of positions lately. Not to mention her closeness to big banks and wall street.

[hrmjustin]

52. i jump on posters who smear my friends and accuse them on bogus accusations.

We really on done.

Get your last word in if you want but we are done.

[Duckhunter935]

55. truth is not a smear

I will be looking for similar stories on Hillary. Here are a couple I found after a quick look.
Clinton May Be Older But She Still Has Younger Voters
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251404376
Hillary Clinton and the 2016 Democrats: Mostly Liberal, Together
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251395625
Clinton Starts Running Against the GOP Congress
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251399592

At least most of your posts are against the republicans. I see not one positive story about a democratic candidate other than Hillary though.


Have a great day and a wonderful fourth of July holiday

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251424450#post6

Have a great one, I have to go now!

[MoonRiver]

20. Your, biased, interpretation. Nuff said.

[rogerashton]

40. Could we shift the focus to a Republican?

The amateurs at the Progressive Pac had some difficulties with compliance with complicated Federal regulations. I suppose a conservative might understand that. And they paid a fine that was about 14% of what they raised.

Now consider the PAC known as The Right to Rise.

https://righttorisepac.org/

http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2015/04/22/why-jeb-bushs-super-pac-plan-is-potentially-illegal/

Founded by Jeb Bush. Until his formal announcement three weeks ago, he continued to control it. It still has his picture on its web page. Now -- aside from the technicalities that the Reuters blog points out -- wasn't Bush' claim that he was not a candidate in April and May a fraud? If it is reasonable for the Progressive PAC to be fined 14% of its fundraising for 2012-2014, shouldn't Right to Rise face at least a proportionate penalty? Come to that, shouldn't Mr. Bush be prosecuted for the felony of fraud?

And is any of that likely to happen?

[Duckhunter935]

43. He should be held accountable

But I bet he or the PAC will not be. Some are more equal than others!

[HereSince1628]

68. Who is 'he', Sanders? PACs can't legally coordinate with candidates

[DonViejo]

47. Sure. But you aren't going to find news regarding the GOP...

candidates and that primary in the GDP Forum, you have to go to the GD Forum for that.

From the SOP for the GDP Forum:

A forum for general discussion of the Democratic presidential primaries. Disruptive meta-discussion is forbidden.

[Duckhunter935]

53. That should be true

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251399451
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251405109
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251398768
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251400916
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251397333
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251397353

[DonViejo]

58. Given the restriction on posts regarding the GOP Primary became effective on June 25...

Last edited Sat Jul 4, 2015, 01:20 PM - Edit history (1)

of this year, and every post you've linked to in your comment, above, was posted long before the SOP change went into effect, they are in compliance with the SOP.

Oh, BTW, I really enjoyed reading your comment in this thread:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251421300

-------------------
On edit:

Oh, dear!

[Duckhunter935]

66. Nice to know you are following the SOP

I was unaware that there was a change and you did not mention it in your post, My apologies.

I am glad you did post that one Bernie story, thank you. I hope you will be able to post more as it does look like by the number and types you post you show some serious bias.

[Cha]

76. Yeah, Hillary Supporters aren't allowed to have "serious biases", Don!

[Sheepshank]

62. If the article had only stated it was a PAC...wouldn't the next obvious question be......

.....who's PAC? I never took this as a slam against Bernie since we already know Candidates don't have financial control over PACs, or at least it's time everyone knew that.

I'm actually a little more curious that the financial guy at the PAC is in some sort of leadership campaign role in the Bernie campaign. Is that ok? this from a post above :


"The Burlington-based committee’s treasurer, Phil Fiermonte, a longtime Sanders aide and currently the field director for Sanders’ presidential campaign, received a letter from the FEC in December warning that the committee may have failed to file required...."

http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20150704/THISJUSTIN/707049929

[hrmjustin]

63. Stop trying to use logic. Some people don't like that.

[MoonRiver]

73. Series (sic)!

[BainsBane]

69. How dare the FEC think the laws apply to Bernie?

Or PACs that promote him? Don't they know he is more important than law?

[MoonRiver]

74. No, no, he's too pure. Cannot look, do not look.

[Comrade Grumpy]

72. I don't know what all the hubbub is about. Looks like a trivial infraction.

Big, fat nothing burger here.

[wyldwolf]

75. I used to work with a PAC. It's REALLY easy to miss those deadlines.

The process is extremely complicated.

Nothing to see here. Move along.