Reining In Anti-Bush Groups (severely restrict new pro-Democratic groups)

[radfringe]

Reining In Anti-Bush Groups
But Key FEC Member May Oppose Immediate Changes in Rules
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31690-2004Mar4.html
By Thomas B. Edsall
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 5, 2004; Page A06


The Federal Election Commission yesterday set in motion regulatory proceedings that could severely restrict new pro-Democratic groups seeking to defeat President Bush.

The proposed regulations, drafted by the agency's general counsel, would severely crimp the fundraising and spending activities of "527" groups, named for the section of the tax code that governs their activities. But advocates of the tough regulations suffered a setback when a Democratic commissioner in a position to cast the key swing vote said she is likely to oppose any changes in the rules that would take effect before the November elections.

The FEC, normally a backwater among Washington agencies, has become a battlefield pitting a flush Republican Party and a Bush campaign with a $100 million-plus war chest against a Democratic Party suffering from a 2 to 1 financial disadvantage. The Republican National Committee, joined by a number of campaign watchdog groups, is pressing the six-member commission to rule that a network of pro-Democratic organizations with a plan to spend as much as $300 million this year, most of it "soft money," is breaking the law.

---snip---

Seeking to capitalize on its McCain-Feingold advantages, the RNC is calling on the FEC to take strong steps to rein in such allied Democratic organizations as America Coming Together (ACT), the Media Fund and America Votes. These organizations are determined to defeat Bush on Nov. 2.

The most significant development yesterday was FEC Vice Chairman Ellen L. Weintraub's broad-based critique of the substance and timing of the proposed agency regulations. Noting that the proposed new rules could take effect in June, Weintraub said that "at this stage in the election cycle, it is unprecedented for the FEC to contemplate changes to the very definitions of terms as fundamental as 'expenditure' and 'political committee' . . . sowing uncertainty during an election year." The proposed new rules would likely prompt organizers to use other legal, but more secretive, mechanisms to influence elections, she said.

[Maccagirl]

1. "527" Groups are breaking the law?

How, RNC, How??? When they can't control everything they cry foul. When is the American public's sense of fairness going to kick in and stop this?

[xchrom]

2. i'm not clearly remembering a time

when the american public and fairness were ever that closely linked.
it seems to me that americans have to be brought kicking and screaming to a more fair playground.
that's what campaign contribution reform was supposed to be about -- instead we have this. and with american's continued apathetic response at the polls, something better is a long ways off.

[PATRICK]

4. Most Americans want reform

Even the polls have said that despite the media's constant pointed efforts to belittle this desire and say how "far down the list" it is. The politicians of course, in all brands, have evaded avoided, deceived and stonewalled this clear and rational need.

When Congressman Gerald Ford after the 1968 close call proposed ending the electoral college(ironically a fading Dem advantage at that time) the Dems stopped it. The Democratic Party this time swallowed a lot of bullets to back Feingold's compromised reforms, but we did not get any clear advantage. The same with HAVA? Why? Because when the plurality shifted in Congress we belatedly tried to get what we could and ignore the poison pills.

The NEXT time, should humanity be allowed the fragile hope of getting a Democratic majority, we had pretty damn well show our commitment to reform when we actually have the chance to do something. And fast.

[NashVegas]

3. Dupe

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x400643