Oh, you "maverick."
John McCain’s defense of his decision to break the law and thumb his nose at the FEC by announcing his departure from the public financing system largely consists of stamping his foot and claiming "Howard did it too!"
Dean applied (but was never certified) for public financing, and never materially benefited from it. Nonetheless, he followed FEC procedure and asked for a decision about whether he could leave after having applied. And the FEC sent him a letter (PDF) telling him it was okay.
So Johnny, if you got one o’those, can we see it?
Meanwhile, as Hugh noted yesterday:
I was going back through the timing. The McCain-FEC story broke in the WaPo on Saturday February 16 as far as I can tell. On its home page, Democracy 21’s last article under What’s New is from February 20. On its Newswire, it has story’s from February 21 and 25. Now the McCain story has been around for 9 days. You would think that even moving at a sedate pace Democracy 21 might have had a chance by now to respond to it or simply link to the story. But as far as I can see zero, zip, nada.
And you would expect something from them. Here are their goals from their mission statement:
Democracy 21 provides the public and media with the latest information and analysis on money and politics, and focuses its activities on:
Promoting campaign finance reforms, such as the ban on soft money enacted in 2002, reforming the Federal Election Commission and fixing the presidential public financing system;
Ensuring that the new campaign finance law and the nation’s other campaign finance laws are effectively implemented and enforced; and
Defending campaign finance laws in the courts.
http://www.democracy21.org/ind…..&SEC={BF5ECB7D-47F4-42A2-B73D-2655EA0A19AE}
Perhaps it’s unfair but I too have to begin to wonder if Wertheimer is another one of these Establishment liberal types like Mark Shields who gets a chubby every time McCain’s name gets mentioned.
But as Mark Schmitt points out, Democracy 21 has been in contact with McCain of late:
As it happens, the five groups sent McCain a letter late last week. Did they ask him to obey the spirit of the law, or keep his own commitment to public financing?
No. They gently asked McCain to sign on as a cosponsor of legislation to fix the presidential public financing system, and respectfully noted his leadership on the issue in the past.
The silence, one would say, is deafening. — except for the gentle sound of the organization’s credibility as it slowly circles the drain.
Related posts:
- VIDEO: Randall Terry Thrown Out of Jim Moran/Howard Dean Event
- Saddam Interrogation: US Still Trying to Show 9/11 Connection as Late as Mid-2004
- When the Women of Afghanistan Speak, Does Howard Dean Listen?
- Early Morning Swim: Howard Dean Exposes Blue Dogs on “Countdown”
- NJ-Gov: Polls Show Very Tight Race Between Corzine, Christie
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Jane!
My girl (Lahoma) and her guy (me) will be looking at the debate tonight.
Me and Lahoma wish we didn’t have to choose between Hillary and Obama. There are two things we like about both candidates. Obama is a Democrat. Hillary is a Democrat. We wish them both well tonight.
IOKIYAR! Particularly, if you’re violating your own namesake legislation…
Has Russ Feingold chimed in about McCan’t violating it? Hmmm…
It’s a tad late for Mr. McCain to get his act together. Soon John McCain will be irrelevant. We in this house are very supportive of public financeing. Senator John (lobbyists suck-up) McCain is not. Obviously.
I kind of like Mark “Crab Cake” Shields myself. He has a sense of humor.
Cheney, Rove, Libby, DeLay, Rice, Rumsfeld, and many more, dwarf McCain in the law breaking business.
Jeebus, I just tooled over to WorldNUTDaily. They are in overdrive on Obama now.
This election is flushing all of the turds to the top of the bowl.
Pretty pathetic. A pack of cowards and ninnies.
-G
It’s because McCain is a War Hero (written in deepest voice). Something us girlies would know nothing about. The big boys understand. Silly me (she writes in high pitch voice), I confess I really need a He-roe.
OKK, we’ve been trying for years to get solely public financed elections, through Voter Owned Hawaii… Here’s today’s story talking about it…
http://www.hawaiitribune-heral…..ocal05.txt
I wonder if McCain realizes he’s the GOP sacrificial presidential candidate stooge?
Does anyone know what the process would be if the FEC determines McCain’s in violation of the McCain-Feingold? Referral to the Justice Department, I would assume. This mess could get crazy.
TY for the link.
Dean withdrew, and the press release by FEC, authorizing funds, notes the withdrawal, and does not certify any funds to Dean. Gephardt, OTOH, didn’t withdraw. He asked the question of the FEC and obtained an Advisory Opinion, but for reasons unknown to me, he didn’t withdraw.
McCain’s decision to act as though he can unilaterally rescind the matching fund deal has nothing to do with the McCain/Feingold Act – McCain/Feingold acts to limit contributions and speech, and has no bearing on the relationship between a campaign and the FEC-administered matching funds program.
Of the major player left standing in this primary season, neither Obama nor Clinton are in the matching funds program, and McCain is going to behave as though he is out of it as well. At some point the FEC will rule on McCain’s spending, and worst case (which is also the likely case, IMO) he will be fined $25,000 for exceeding the spending limits. His best outcome is that this happens AFTER the general election, or whatever event concludes his 2008 candidacy.
good question…
– Does anyone know what the process would be if the FEC determines McCain’s in violation of the McCain-Feingold? –
He won’t be in violation of McCain-Feingold. But if (when) he’s found to be in violation of the rules that pertain to matching public funds for a primary campaign, the FEC will fine him the max — $25,000. The FEC has the power to levy fines on it’s own, and to enlist the power of a court, if need be, to obtain compliance. The “defendant” has the power to enlist the aid of court to fight the FEC-imposed penalty.
“I could dance with you till the cows come home…On second thought, I’d rather dance with the cows when you came home.”
Duck Soup-1933
Tw3k where are you, we need a cow.
The widest avenue to good, fair and ’sunny’ government is through full and complete public funding of elections
Step one in the process would be for Bush to nominate and the Senate to confirm candidates to fill the four vacation positions on the FEC. From wiki:
Right now, the FEC can’t even hold a meeting, because they lack a quorum.
Just as Oswald cried, “I’m the patsy”. McVain knows in his heart of hearts he’s being played the stupid fool but for just a little whilte he wants to play like he’s a contender.
What you say sounds reasonable. ;0)
Who could have imagined that John McCain was just another smarmy, two-faced, lying, crooked Republican politician?
Well certainly not the press. It’s going to take a lot to knock St. Johnny off his pedestal because the Mainstream Corporate Press certainly won’t do it-it was complicit in his canonization.
Now, maybe if he actually did “do” Vickie…
Tonight Senator Obama will be honing himself for Mr. McCain.
Radio talk show host Bill Cunningham’s surrogating for McCain today at a rally was pretty awful. Calling him Hussien and how he will join forces with the terrorists by talking to our enemies. Of course McCain apologized for all this to CNN’s John King after the rally and that it would never happen again. Once again old John gets a pass from the MSM.
The problem is though, ayk Cboldt there is no quorum in the FEC do to McConnell’s insistance on Hans von Spakovsky being appointed or the dems don’t get their nominees on the FEC. So afik there is no way for the FEC to make any ruling against McCain or his unusual bank loan which was predicated on disbursement of funds by an FEC which cannot disburse funds without a quorum of 4 commissioners.
So what happens? I’m not very familiar with the FEC’s workings and you probably are, but many people have written they wouldn’t issue a decision before November. But let’s say somehow there is a quorum and the logjam in the Senate is broken. Let’s say the FEC looks at their name and says “aha–we are the Federal Election Commission–and the dictionary says we deal with um er Elections. They rule against McCain which means that he can’t begin to match the fundraising of Obama (or Clinton although I think she’s out but doesn’t know it yet–kitchen sink and all).
So FEC expedites a ruling against McCain and he decides to appeal to the D.C. Circuit. Let’s say the D.C. Circuit is asked for an extraordinary expedition of their ruling and it gets expedited and cert. from the Supreme Court. Then we have a Supreme Court ruling without Sandra Swing Vote O’Conner who put Bush in the White House in 2000 with her 5-4 vote.
And who has replaced O’Connor. Roberts and Alito. So if there were a litigation route, and it were expedited, I think McCain would have the courts on his side.
My prediction is that we don’t even get a functional FEC to weigh in on this, and if we do, McCain’s thousands of attorneys–people like former S.G. Ted Olson, and many other experienced D.C. Circuit and S. Ct. appellate attorneys will be in full gear.
As Cboldt has said this isn’t McCain-Feingold here.
That pix of McCain and Bush hugging each other resonates. Doesn’t it.
I heard that after McCain apologized, Bill Cunningham went back on his radio show and threw his support behind Nader!
Refreshing it would be if someone held anyone accountable for anything.
Is it tonights debate being streamed online?
Ted Olson is a real piece of work.
Olson successfully represented presidential candidate George W. Bush in the Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore, which effectively determined the final result of the contested 2000 Presidential election.
I’d love to see this issue go somewhere productive, ie – coverage of the ridiculous spot McCain has put himself in by falling short on funding, pledging future FEC money as collatoral, changing his mind, and then sticking it to the rules he’s been bragging about creating in the first place.
But this issue is going nowhere, no matter what we in the netroots do. It will be gone forever by Monday.
Offtopic to FEC but..
I must say lots of things make me laugh but watching Bill Cunningham radio show host parade about the stage full of hate and a frontal lobe full of mush crowing “Barak Hussein Obama” over and over is the personification of a moron and a metaphor for why McCain’s campaign is going to be flown into the ground month after month by 527s and bigoted idiots.
Don’t vote for someone because their parents named him. Brilliant.
I can’t wait for the Republican 527’s to crank up their ignorance.
Good gawd, Jane. Just by your description in your post I could hear the sucking sound of their credibility! Wow. You are good, man. :-)
Okay, minor point, but what is that a picture of? I clicked thru the link but was not enlightened.
In the last 24 hours, I’ve seen news reports and photos from Clinton at a “fundraiser” in Boston and one in Washington D.C. Shouldn’t she be spending all her time in the states voting on March 4th? It’s crunch time after all.
Does this signal she can’t raise enough from within OH and TX to compete, and has to go where her BigMoney supporters are?
Jane’s upstairs with Lewis Black.
– My prediction is that we don’t even get a functional FEC to weigh in on this, and if we do, McCain’s thousands of attorneys–people like former S.G. Ted Olson, and many other experienced D.C. Circuit and S. Ct. appellate attorneys will be in full gear. –
I figure the Republicans in the Senate will continue to object to confirming nominees. But eventually, either Congress disbands the Commission, or staffs it. At some point there will be a ruling. My point was that McCain wants this to happen AFTER his campaign is concluded, however it concludes.
At that point, for 25 grand, he’ll just pay it with some sort of cover letter that says he didn’t do anything wrong. He’ll accurately note that he didn’t take any public money, he’ll lie that he didn’t get any benefit from being authorized to obtain matching funds (but he did, see ballot access and, probably, a loan that otherwise wasn’t secure), and he’ll take the resulting lumps in public opinion.
He’s always been a weasel.
Oh … without saying it directly (it was implied in “he’ll just pay it”), I very much doubt McCain will litigate an adverse FEC decision. The costs vastly outweigh any benefit, and he knows, in his heart of hearts, that he’d lose.
The language in the loan and security agreements is a very thin disguise. And the wonder of it is, that had his campaign faltered, he’d not have withdrawn and the public money would have been forthcoming. Claiming that the loan and security agreement language is NOT security for the loan is a fairly transparent fiction. Why withdraw and come back in, if you haven’t spent so much as to become disqualified?
And once he opts out, as he “has,” he doesn’t care that he’s not receiving matching funds and he doesn’t care if he becomes “disqualified.”
He doesn’t have a corner on doubletalk, I’ll give him that much.
Exactly and that’s the problem. If he is fined 25 grand that’s nothing. There are thousands of people who would fight for the “honor” of paying this.
So what I was hoping you’d help me figure out is how Dean’s complaint is a real problem for McCain. He absolutely got ballot access and the loan he couldn’t secure playing the public financing card–but I’m trying to figure out how the FEC does him any real harm if it even functions in time.
BTW is there anything new going on with the FISA conferences–and how do you see the timing of anything eventful right now?
The problem for McCain is it becomes another example showing that “Mr Clean elections” isn’t.
That’s absolutely true. It’s not going to matter to his followers, but as an election issue I think it will resonate with Independents.
– I’m trying to figure out how the FEC does him any real harm if it even functions in time. –
A definitive ruling from the Commission (bipartisan, etc.) is just another kink in the so-called “straight talk express.” It would raise public awareness of McCain’s deliberate gaming of loan language in light of FEC Advisory Opinions, trying to have his cake and eat it too.
Deans’ complaint creates a further need for formal action, although the FEC had initiated formal action by its own letter. Publicity of the issue is harmful to McCain.
– is there anything new going on with the FISA conferences–and how do you see the timing of anything eventful right now? –
No formal conference, but a bicameral bunch claims to be negotiating “something.” Whatever that is, isn’t public. Reid tried to start a formal House/Senate conference from the Senate side, and was met with objection.
Reid has introduced a couple of PAA-extension bills, which have the nifty effect of erasing the current short term “lapse” by being retroactive to Feb 15 or 16. One of those two is a 30 day extension — 30 days from the day the president signs it into law — the other is an extension until July 2009.
The president’s bill is hung up in the House. There may be other extension, etc. also available in the House, I haven’t checked. Right now, the action is mostly in the political (newspaper) venue.
Carolyn @ 36
water headed down the drain (just like some campaigns).
I’m guessing on FISA timing — pure hunch based on newspaper contents and the relative amount of heat on multiple subjects. I’m guessing action is in a holding pattern for a week or two. The RNC has produced a slick “be very afraid” video ad (NRO has a link to it, the ad copy is on YouTube), but the economy and election are sucking up oxygen that would otherwise go to FISA.
At some point, the political “price” will be more clear to each side. I think Bush can afford to lose the immunity demand. The issue of extra-statutory surveillance goes away as a political cudgel once he’s out of office, and the Democratic president isn’t going to have a pressing need to push the issue (e.g., remove state secret and let the cases move on, or disclose the letters used to order the surveillance) after being elected.
But, in the other direction, to the extent the public accepts the argument that retroactive immunity is vital to obtain security, the DEMs may buckle — figuring that it won’t cost too many votes.
Politicians are ALL about elections and power over the people. “Civil rights” is just a buzzword for getting votes.
Thanks for the update. The status of state secrets as a club will be interesting after the Dem gets in the West Wing.
Ah, Democracy 21. The people who thought that all Halliburton had to do to cloud the minds of inveterate internet junkies was to spend $25 million on an astroturf blog. How like them to avert their eyes when actual election shenanigans are occurring.