Democracy's Daily Posts from

FEC States the Obvious in 21 pages of Complexity
Bureaucrats at the Federal Elections Commission have made an artform out of drafting regulations that are both so weak that fat cats can easily evade them and so complex that reporters and citizens can hardly tell what's going on. This week the commission issued an advisory opinion that's a case in point.

The opinion, which is available here, takes 21 pages to essentially say that if a bunch of people have formed a political action committee whose purpose is to spend money influencing federal elections, that they have to abide by the laws regulating how money is spent in federal elections. These laws currently say that the PAC can't accept any money from corporations or labor unions, and can't take any more than $5000 from one person. Sounds like a no-brainer, right?

The issue becomes complex because of past FEC rulings that said that PACs can in fact raise money beyond the limits specified in the law, so long as they don't use that money to influence federal races. So, they can use unregulated funds, or so-called "soft" money to do things like influence state elections. Today's ruling essentially just says that they can't use those funds to in any way support or oppose federal candidates. Two commissioners voted against even this commonsense regulation.

Coming up next month, the FEC will consider whether or not other organizations, such as those created to lobby for legislation, can spend soft money in ways that influence federal elections. Citizens should stay tuned.

Enron Exec Jeffrey Skilling Indicted
Former Enron CEO Jeffrey Skilling was handcuffed and hauled into court today, where he plead innocent to 42 counts of conspiracy, fraud, and insider trading. Skilling jumped ship from Enron a few months before the stack of lies that it had built its foundation upon collapsed.

Skilling is innocent until proven guilty, but he is charged with some pretty serious crimes. He reportedly pocketed tens of millions of dollars by selling his stock while misleading shareholders, pensioners, and the public about Enron's finances.

Politicians have tried very hard to describe Enron as a business scandal, but not a political one. But Skilling certainly made his share of political contributions. I've pasted below the results of a search I conducted at the Federal Election Commission's website. Skilling gave $100,000 to the Republican Party, gave generously and regularly to the Enron political action committee, and routinely dished out a thousand bucks to Republican and Democrat politicians. Seems like the question that these politicians must now answer is, "Why did a guy like Jeffrey Skilling like you enough to give you so much money?" They'll surely claim that they gave Skilling no special favors. Many of them may never have even met the guy. But Jeffrey Skilling doesn't seem like a fellow who just fell off the potato patch yesterday. He knew how to move money around to get results that were in his interests. His ability to back politicians that served those interests comes at the expense of the rest of us.

Non-Federal Receipts "Exempt From Limits"

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77005

NRCCC - NON FEDERAL #1
08/01/1997 25000.00 98032662682

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098

RNC REPUBLICAN NATIONAL STATE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE
05/29/1998 25000.00 98033182099

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORPORATION

RNC REPUBLICAN NATIONAL STATE ELECTIONS COMMITTEE
06/30/2000 50000.00 20035763592

Total Soft Money: 100000.00


Contributions to Political Committees

SKILLING, JEFF
HOUSTON, TX 77002
ENRON

WAREING, PETER STAUB
VIA PETER WAREING FOR CONGRESS
03/15/1999 1000.00 99034660165

SKILLING, JEFFREY
HOUSTON, TX 77005
ENRON

CRAPO, MICHAEL D
VIA MIKE CRAPO FOR US SENATE
09/03/1998 1000.00 98020203878

SKILLING, JEFFREY
HOUSTON, TX 77005
ENRON CAPITAL & TRADE

AMERICANS FOR A REPUBLICAN MAJORITY (ARMPAC)
10/30/1998 5000.00 98033993882
04/02/1999 5000.00 99034500028

SKILLING, JEFFREY
HOUSTON, TX 77019
ENRON CORP./PRESIDENT AND CEO

ENRON CORP POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE INC.
08/15/2001 1041.00 22990150269

SKILLING, JEFFREY
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON

COMBEST, LARRY ED
VIA COMBEST CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
06/14/1999 500.00 99034730572

GORTON, SLADE
VIA FRIENDS FOR SLADE GORTON
03/08/1999 1000.00 99020100321

SKILLING, JEFFREY
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORP

AMERICAN DREAM PAC
06/16/2000 1000.00 20035832351

MCCOLLUM, BILL
VIA BILL MCCOLLUM FOR US SENATE
10/29/1999 500.00 20020081472

STENHOLM, CHARLIE W.
VIA STENHOLM FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE
06/30/1999 500.00 99034734183

SKILLING, JEFFREY
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORPORATION

HASTERT, J DENNIS
VIA HASTERT FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE
10/12/1998 1000.00 98033800961

WHITMAN, CHRISTINE TODD
VIA WHITMAN FOR US SENATE
08/24/1999 1000.00 20020051958

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77002
ENRON

SCHUMER, CHARLES E
VIA SCHUMER '98
06/15/1998 1000.00 98020153427
10/16/1998 1000.00 98020290194

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77005
ENRON CAPITAL & TRADE RESOURCES

D'AMATO, ALFONSE M
VIA FRIENDS OF SENATOR D'AMATO (1998 COMMITTEE)
05/21/1997 1000.00 97020101330

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77005
ENRON CORP

BOND, CHRISTOPHER S
VIA MISSOURIANS FOR KIT BOND
06/24/1997 1000.00 97020100644

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77005
ENRON GAS

HUTCHISON, KAY BAILEY
VIA KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON FOR SENATE COMMITTEE
03/21/1997 1000.00 97020071916

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098

LAZIO, RICK A
VIA LAZIO 2000 INC
09/03/2000 1000.00 21020063254

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098
CORP

ENRON CORP POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE INC.
01/31/1997 250.00 97032023299
02/28/1997 250.00 97032023299
03/31/1997 250.00 97032023299
04/30/1997 250.00 97032023299

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON

SCHUMER, CHARLES E
VIA FRIENDS OF SCHUMER
08/14/2001 1000.00 22020130471
08/14/2001 1000.00 22020130470

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORP

MARKEY, EDWARD JOHN
VIA MARKEY FOR CONGRESS COMMITTEE
03/25/1999 1000.00 99034681505
10/12/1999 1000.00 20035120021

SMITH, GORDON HAROLD
VIA GORDON SMITH FOR U S SENATE COMMITTEE INC (96)
12/18/1997 500.00 98020060105

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORP AND SUBSIDIARIES

ENRON CORP POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE INC.
05/31/1997 250.00 97032314962
06/30/1997 250.00 97032314962
07/31/1997 250.00 98032764810
08/31/1997 250.00 98032764810
09/30/1997 250.00 98032764810
10/31/1997 250.00 98032764810
11/18/1997 250.00 98032764810
12/23/1997 250.00 98032764810
01/27/1998 250.00 98032833442
02/23/1998 250.00 98032893605
03/24/1998 250.00 98033044221
04/17/1998 250.00 98033143174
05/22/1998 250.00 98033190866
06/25/1998 250.00 98033330546
07/24/1998 250.00 98033482101
08/24/1998 250.00 98033563849
09/25/1998 250.00 98033852419
10/23/1998 250.00 98034083244
11/23/1998 250.00 98034083244
12/23/1998 250.00 99034242977
01/25/1999 250.00 99034652307

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORPORATION

BURNS, CONRAD
VIA FRIENDS OF CONRAD BURNS - 2000
06/15/2000 1000.00 20020181817

DELAY, THOMAS DALE
VIA TOM DELAY CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE
08/30/1999 1000.00 20035141149
11/01/2000 1000.00 20036664666

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ERON CORPORATION

BUSH, GEORGE W
VIA BUSH FOR PRESIDENT INC.
03/29/1999 1000.00 99034441714

SKILLING, JEFFREY K
WORTHINGTON, OH 43085

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE
11/08/2002 -13.00 23990766860

SKILLING, JEFFREY K. MR.
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORP AND SUBSIDIARIES/PRES

ENRON CORP POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE INC.
01/17/2000 208.00 20990043791
01/31/2000 208.00 20990043791
02/15/2000 208.00 20990070389
02/29/2000 208.00 20990070389
03/24/2000 208.00 20990094136
03/31/2000 208.00 20990094136
04/15/2000 208.00 20990112422
04/30/2000 208.00 20990112422
05/15/2000 208.00 20990152121
05/31/2000 208.00 20990152121
06/15/2000 208.00 20990167982
06/30/2000 208.00 20990167982

SKILLING, JEFFREY K. MR.
HOUSTON, TX 77098
ENRON CORP AND SUBSIDIARIES/PRESI

ENRON CORP POLITICAL ACTION COMMITTEE INC.
07/15/2000 208.00 20990185717
07/31/2000 208.00 20990185717
08/15/2000 208.00 20990208634
08/31/2000 208.00 20990208635
09/15/2000 208.00 20990226190
09/29/2000 208.00 20990226190
10/13/2000 208.00 20990233570
10/31/2000 208.00 20990253379
11/15/2000 208.00 20990253379
11/30/2000 208.00 21990017242
12/15/2000 208.00 21990017242
12/29/2000 208.00 21990017242

Total Contributions: 44270.00

Money in the Presidential Primaries
Howard Dean announced today that he's suspending his campaign for the presidency. This marks the first time since good data became available in 1976 that the candidate who had raised the most money in the year before the primary didn't win his party's nomination. (John Connelly spent more than Reagan in 1980, but he did so with personal wealth. Reagan had raised more from donors.)

Some will surely jump to the conclusion that this proves that money doesn't buy elections. USA Today is running a story with the headline "Primaries show money isn't the deciding factor." Having the most money isn't always the determining factor, but its still the case that not having enough money guarantees failure. Consider:

1) Does anyone honestly think that John Kerry would still be in this race were it not for the $6 million dollars he loaned his campaign after mortgaging his house last December? How many of the rest of us could do that?

2) Other money has been flowing Kerry's way after his significant wins and momentum in early states. But, can anyone predict what the race would look like even at this point if both John Edwards and John Kerry had equal money to spend in remaining states?

3) Does anyone know if Dean would still be in the race today had he not wasted so much money early on? If Dean had abided by the voluntary spending limits, would he have been able to afford the negative ads in Iowa that backfired and may have been why he lost? Just because Dean spent his money foolishly doesn't mean that money can't buy elections, just that it didn't this time around.

Money in politics is a little like money in the stock market. You may not get rich by investing and there's always the chance you'll blow it all. But, the more money you have to invest, the better the odds you'll walk away a winner. And, for most of us who don't have much money to invest, there's little chance we'll win anything.

How Big Donors Alter Campaigns
Today's Wall Street Journal offers a clear insight into just how big money distorts our politics long before a candidate even wins office. John Kerry, who barring a huge scandal would appear to have pretty much cinched the Democratic nomination for president, now needs to furiously raise funds to compete with President Bush. Bush is sitting on something like a hundred million dollars in his warchest. To try to catch up, Kerry is going to where the money is -- Wall Street. "If we want ammunition to compete," says one Kerry backer, "the financial community has got to get on board now."

The story claims that there are indeed many moderate Republican Wall Streeters who are concerned about the economy and the deficit, and willing to back an alternative to Bush. But, there is a price to pay for a Democrat who wants to raise money on Wall Street. These donors want him to tone down his "populist, corporate-bashing rhetoric." Kerry's advisors are telling the big donors not to worry, that Kerry is secretly very pro-business and he'll be much more "nuanced" going forward.

Wall Street was fond of Bill Clinton as well. One thing we can know for certain is that there will always be one candidate willing to take a pro-corporation line and take the corporate money that follows. That being the case, the other leading candidate has to win the support of at least some folks on Wall Street as well, just to try to keep up. This all but guarantees that both leading party candidates will feel the need to steer clear of too much criticism of corporate America in their campaigns. Even if the rest of us are getting screwed by corporate America, our candidates don't dare say so. If voters find our candidates campaigns full of hot air but short of substance and unwilling to stand up to the special interests that are taking advantage of working families, they tend to stay home and not vote for anyone. This works just fine for the candidates, as they can still win with a smaller electorate. In fact, its easier. And, it works just fine for Wall Street. Whichever candidate wins, they can be sure that they'll have a "nuanced" position when it comes to standing up for the rest of us.

Delay's Texas Fundraising Under Investigation
US House Majority Leader Tom Delay may have illegally used corporate contributions to help candidates win races in the Texas state house. Delay comes from Texas, so he naturally cares about his home state. But, more importantly, when his allies took control of the statehouse, Delay's right hand man Tom Craddick became Speaker. Craddick then moved to redraw the congressional district lines to give Delay's party a big advantage in Congress -- thus securing his position as Majority Leader.

It's illegal to use corporate and labor money in Texas elections, as with federal elections. But, the New York Times reports here that Delay used money from corporations (without asking the corporations shareholders) to pay for fundraising, polling, and other expenses that helped his favored candidates. The results were quite impressive. A whopping 18 of the 21 candidates backed by Delay and his corporate money won.

The one company mentioned in the article, Union Pacific Railroads, says that they gave the money without any explicit agreement that if the candidates won those candidates would vote for Delay's right hand man to be speaker of the Texas House, or that Craddick would then try to rig congressional districts to help Delay. I have no reason to doubt what the Union Pacific spokesperson says. But, regardless, the railroad gave big bucks to influence elections and in return has people they like controlling both the Texas state house and the US House of Representatives. Seems like that's an opportunity the rest of us should have as well, and one we'll only get with tougher campaign finance laws.


Bush and the Daytona 500
I tuned in to the Daytona 500 just after President Bush's opening remarks, but I gather he said some nice things before the traditional "gentlemen, start your engines." Politicians these days seem to be going out of their way to buddy up to the NASCAR crowd. Democrats like John Edwards and Bob Graham, like the President, have spent time at the track. I'm sure it cost the taxpayer a pretty penny to fly the President in Air Force one to the race, but I have no problem with that. The President should be able to get out of town every now and then, and these days we need to be sure that his security is top rate. Indeed, I think its a good thing that candidates campaign by going out and speaking to people, rather than just relying on TV ads. The Republican Party was on hand registering voters, which is always a good thing to do. Indeed, if there was less big money in politics, candidates would be forced to do even more of this kind of thing. Getting out there, shaking hands, and looking for photo ops with the likes of Richard Petty. Details can be found here at the NASCAR site.

Here's the one thing I don't get. The president took off in Air Force One with something like 80 laps to go. I don't know about you, but if I had tickets to the Daytona 500, I don't think I'd leave till the race was over.