MyDD :: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case

FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case

by Todd Beeton, Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:17:14 PM EST

From Adam B at dailyKos:

By a vote of 4-1, the FEC this afternoon voted to approve its draft advisory opinion denying John Edwards for President's ability to seek matching funds for contributions made via ActBlue.

The John Edwards campaign responds:

"Although today's decision by the FEC is a setback to the progressive grassroots movement, our campaign has all of the resources it needs to aggressively make our case to voters. Even without the ActBlue contributions included, we will meet our projected $10 million in matching funds."

Thanks to commissioner Ellen Weintraub for her efforts in this. Her vote was the lone voice of dissent with the other two Democrats on the committee joining with the Republicans in imposing the most literal reading of the law based on an outdated model of political contributions.

Tags: 2008 presidential election, Democratic primary, John Edwards, FEC, ActBlue (all tags)

Permalink :: 20 Comments :: Post a Comment

I don't regret the $$$ I sent Edwards via ActBlue. (none / 0)

Your donation will be doubled over here.

John Edwards 2008

by MeanBoneII on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:22:35 PM EST

This is going to HURT (none / 0)

ActBlue!

Somehow this NEEDS to be fixed and SOON!

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:30:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Make Donations NOW (none / 0)

at: http://johnwedwards.com

I just donated $25.00 Hopefully I can do more later.

As I stated over at Dkos, maybe we need to start a "Bat" for Edwards type of fundraiser based on this FEC decision?

How can We or the campaign make this happen?

If .. ugh.. ron p. people can do it, then we can to!

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:23:00 PM EST

Check the recations here (none / 0)

Most everyone, even people who support other candidates, are supportive of John Edwards on this.

http://johnedwards.com

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:29:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Check the recations here (none / 0)

OOPS!

I meant to check here at Dkos:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/12/14 /152345/30

Washington Woman

Progressive Blue

by kevin22262 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 06:23:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

Is anyone planning a broader challenge to this in the courts rather than simply allowing for FEC ruling to stand?

by bruh21 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:26:09 PM EST

That's awful. (none / 0)

Are they out to screw John Edwards?

by CarolinaNumber23 on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:28:28 PM EST

Re: That's awful. (2.00 / 1)

No they are not looking to screw him. If you are looking to assign blame you've got to look at the Edwards campaign themselves. I posted this in the other thread but I'll repeat it here.

In going to some of the links provided before to the FEC site, I saw some Obama stuff and looked into what that was all about. People probably don't remember, but early on Obama pledged that he would abide by campaign financing rules if his eventual Republican opponent did the same. Specifically he was taking about a scenario which could happen if McCain got the nomination and the two of them could take that step together. Obama's campaign wrote to the FEC and sought a preliminary ruling about how they would need to handle the GE funds they may collect during the primary to make sure they were matchable under the FEC ruling if they chose that path.

This is what the Edwards camp should have done before making the arrangement with ActBlue. No matter how you spin it, it was a failure in being cautious and in anticipation, by the Edwards advisors. It's a pretty big mistake.

by Piuma on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:34:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

From what I read this vote was a no-brainer. There are only two ways to proceed IMO. One, change the regulation. Two, conform the process to satisfy the regulation. I think the latter is easier.

by Javier Doval on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:34:52 PM EST

I wonder how many are lawyers? (none / 0)

Because those commissioners who voted for the overly literal meaning of the written word in the law could be considered textualists in the mold of Scalia.

McCain is defining Obama, and Obama is neither defining himself, nor McCain. This is awful.

by jgarcia on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 04:51:22 PM EST

Re: I wonder how many are lawyers? (2.00 / 1)

What do you want them to do, look to see if there are any presidential signing statements concerning the intent of campaign finance laws?

Things You Don't Talk About in Polite Company: Religion, Politics, the Occasional Intersection of Both

by Anthony de Jesus on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:06:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

I'm sure those two Dems have no links to the Clinton administration...

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK

by Vox Populi on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:00:51 PM EST

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

One's a Reid ally, the other's a former AFSCME lawyer.

by Adam B on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:15:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

Thanks for taking your best shot on this, Adam.

"Another problem we have...is that in election years we behave somewhat as primitive peoples do at the time of the full moon." --Harry Truman

by Steve M on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:45:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

So... both are likely supporting Clinton's bid and have an interest in John Edwards having less money to use.

The sharpest criticism often goes hand in hand with the deepest idealism and love of country. ~RFK

by Vox Populi on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 06:16:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

Well of course. It's always Clinton's fault, isn't it? It couldn't just be sloppy work from someone in the Edwards camp. That would be ridiculous.

No Way. No How. No McCain.

by Denny Crane on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:12:57 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards (none / 0)

IS it possible for the campaign to notify previous donors what amount of donations made on-line were not counted for matching? I donated $250 online with teh intent of having it matched -- I believe strongly in public financing of elections -- and wonder how much if any of my previous donation counts towards the match? I'll give again up to my $250 cap if they can notify donors how much could be matched?

by desmoulins on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:18:21 PM EST

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

P.. person
"If you are looking to assign blame you've got to look at the Edwards campaign themselves."

Yep..you are exactly right.
Without Edwards this would not have happened so soon.

The nerve of a campaign based on challenging the power restricting our voice...well..challenge a power restricting our voice...

"If you want to end war and stuff, you gotta sing loud"...Arlo Guthrie

by nogo war on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:41:12 PM EST

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (2.00 / 1)

Why didn't they have the foresight and spend the time to get a preliminary ruling from the FEC before starting the arrangement with ActBlue? It is something that anyone's campaign finance committee should do. The FEC is not restricting your voice - they have clear rules pertaining to PACs which are meant to protect all of us. When we questioned this before the decision Joe Trippi came in here and said he wasn't to blame but never explained why the campaign wasn't more cautious and whether they knew this potential problem when they decided to go the matching route.

by Piuma on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 07:43:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: FEC Rules Against Edwards In ActBlue Case (none / 0)

That's a nonsense argument. I'm on record saying that I hoped that the FEC would look the other way, but clearly they didn't. And look the other way would have been what they needed to do to rule in his favor. This was a pretty simple decision, and it was easily avoidable by the Edwards folks. Obama and Clinton both saw this coming (and avoided it) because their campaigns did their homework about Act Blue vis-a-vis the FEC regulations.

This was a self inflicted wound, and as a Clinton supporter, I've seen some of those. No one to blame here but whoever was in charge of this for the Edwards campaign.

No Way. No How. No McCain.

by Denny Crane on Sat Dec 15, 2007 at 01:11:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

You are not logged in.

In order to post a comment, you must be logged in. If you have a member account, please log in to comment.

If not, you can make an account right here. It's quick and free.