Good Government Groups: Close Lieberman's Petty Cash Loophole

by Matt Stoller, Tue Oct 24, 2006 at 04:34:10 PM EDT

(hat tip on the picture to Billmon)

If a Senator put $387,000 in cash out on the streets in the final two weeks before the election - we're talking cash here - and then failed to disclose where it went to reporters or anyone else by using the petty cash account, wouldn't you think that good government groups who care about campaign finance laws and disclosure would be slightly interested? I would. Yet since Lieberman revealed this on his FEC forms late last week, only the Lamont campaign has been willing to file an FEC complaint.

If Lieberman gets away with this, FEC laws are effectively meaningless, and so are state election laws. I'm frankly surprised that a scandal of this magnitude is going largely ignored by Democrats, Republicans supporting Alan Schlesinger, and good government groups across the spectrum. Can you imagine if Bob Menendez did this in New Jersey? The good government groups would be all over it. Or Tom Kean Jr? You'd see a press conference with Reid and Schumer the next day. And yet, because it's Joe Lieberman, he's handing out hundreds of thousands in cold hard cash before the primary to undisclosed individuals, there's no outside groups calling foul. Still, we're all in this together, which means that if Lieberman is allowed to shovel hundreds of thousands of dollars without consequence through his petty cash account, then next cycle you're going to see every Senate, House, and Presidential campaign use it to avoid disclosure requirements. Their claim can simply be 'Lieberman did it', and they will be absolutely right.

Where are the good government groups? Common Cause? CREW? Democracy 21? Public Campaign? Public Citizen? Any one of them could file a complaint with the FEC. Any one of them could file a complaint with the state board of elections. Here's information on how to do it. This is a really really bad precedent to allow to be set.

Since my encounter with the FEC during the 'should we regulate blog' episode, I've become mixed on campaign finance laws. I tend to think that public financing of campaigns makes a lot more sense than the pay-to-play system we have right now. But I am an absolute believer in disclosure, that's just a no-brainer.

Allowing large amounts of untraceable cash through the petty cash loophole onto the streets is unabashedly a bad thing. It should be illegal, but even if it's not, it should be strongly discouraged by good government groups.

Tags: Alan Schlesinger, Connecticut, CT-Sen, Joe Lieberman, Ned Lamont (all tags)

Comments

14 Comments

Sort by

permalink

Re: Good Government Groups

Matt,
You should cross-post this at Daily Kos. There are so many lawyers over there that several of them must have connections and can push these groups to action.

by grayslady 2006-10-24 05:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Good Government Groups

Or maybe some user can crosspost there if Matt does not have the time, providing the appropriate link and exceprts.

Meanwhile, write letters to the Courant and the Times. Does Colin McEnroe have no say whatsoever at the Courant? It is clear he doesn't buy Lieberman's bullshit, but the paper seems so pro-Liebermaan.

by Pravin 2006-10-24 05:31PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Good Government Groups

I put it on Dkos, thanks.

by Matt Stoller 2006-10-24 06:04PM | 0 recs

permalink

Where are the Good Government Groups?

That really is an excellent question. I can't believe that nearly $400K of undisclosed cash disbursements isn't raising more eyebrows.

In the meantime how hard would it be to look at how other campaigns have listed "petty cash" in the last weeks before a primary or general election? I will admit that I haven't looked at the FEC website or filings for anyone so I don't know how easy it would be to collect and colate that info.

This is the kind of thing you would expect the Good Gov't types to sic some interns on but if they won't do it I'm willing to try.

by NateP 2006-10-24 05:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Where are the Good Government Groups?

What would get their attention? Does it have to be a million dollar slush fund? If this is OK, every campaign will do it. The Republican out in California wouldn't have bothered to pay his wife as a campaign fundraising consultant if he'd known you can just take the money out in cash and fill in a form that says "stipend volunteers."

by Rowena 2006-10-25 04:11AM | 0 recs

permalink

Joe is a 'good man' and thus not...

subject to the law. Any law other than Yahweh.

HoJo seems to be getting away with his ReThug kabuki.

The citizens of CT will have a lot to answer for if this vile reptile gets into the Senate.

As will all the members of the 'Democrat' Party that failed to campaign for Ned.

I intend to keep fighting for a progressive, enlightened America but I can assure you I will not forget the likes of 'Big Dog', The Hill, Boxer, Pelosi, Schumer, Reid and the list goes on and on.

by Pericles 2006-10-24 06:41PM | 0 recs

permalink

Close Lieberman's Petty Cash Loophole

Matt,

I sent the link to your post to Common Cause and CREW.

by global yokel 2006-10-24 07:28PM | 0 recs

permalink

dude.

I thought you knew Naomi from CREW?

I happen to totally agree, but calling them out like this??

Is it just Drama Flakes(tm)??

-C.

by neutron 2006-10-24 07:34PM | 0 recs

permalink

Close Lieberman's Petty Cash Loophole

This from official Lamont campaign blogger Tim Tagaris:

"I'd say I probably took at least 30 phone calls over a five hour time period about a website hack that wasn't. When I stepped out into the press file on primary day, cameras and microphones from across the room grew legs and found their way to within an inch of my face. There was hardly a news outlet covering the race unwilling to do everything they could (except consult with a tech reporter) to get to the bottom of how we hacked Joe Lieberman's website.

Meanwhile, those were simply baseless accusations not even remotely grounded in any kind of fact. It was on primary day, as the entire country watched and read the news.

Three-hundred and eight-seven thousand dollars that was spent God knows where, and well, there's only a public document filed by the Lieberman campaign (his FEC report) to help raise the question of what happened to it."

Just sayin.

http://nedlamont.com/blog

by global yokel 2006-10-24 07:40PM | 0 recs

permalink

Where, for example, is Ralph Nader?

It's the size of the slush fund that makes this news. Where did it come from? Did the campaign write checks for cash?

In Calif., you'd have to worry about doing jail time for this kind of violation. Does CT, like NJ, have a specific legal authorization for street money?

I don't understand why the newspapers aren't raising all kinds of hell.

Joe Lieberman has an excellent record on campaign finance reform; that alone should make this a man bites python story.

How about a nationwide Business Wire story from MyDD with the documentation attached? As long as it's only Lamont talking, it is being dismissed as late mudslinging.

Somehow, we've got to get this story into the wind. Where, if at all, has it seen print?

by stevehigh 2006-10-24 09:00PM | 0 recs

permalink

Okay. I answered one of my own questions

Google News has exactly one non-blog story:

http://www.courant.com/news/politics/hc- fec1024.artoct24,0,6380064.story

But one more question: Were the contributors who gave the money disclosed? Did the campaign write checks for the cash, or was it also contributed in cash?

A truly Nixonian slush fund has money that came from nowhere that went nowhere.

Is there any state CT campaign law that can be invoked here?

by stevehigh 2006-10-24 09:07PM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Where, for example, is Ralph Nader?

"Joe Lieberman has an excellent record on campaign finance reform; that alone should make this a man bites python story"

sorry i find this comment to be unacceptable. any politican who has not endorsed or worked for full public financing of elections does not have an exccellent record. to do less, is to help protect the current corrupt system. if we are to enjoy a democratic system again ... we must limit all money going into a political race.

by bamabarrron 2006-10-24 10:19PM | 0 recs

permalink

I am not going to rise to his defense

...about this or anything, but he does have that reputation and did author one of the only pieces of a campaign reform passed the year McCain-Feingold was defeated.

My point is that his reputation in his area heightens the irony and makes this more of a news story.

by stevehigh 2006-10-25 05:44AM | 0 recs

permalink

Re: Lieberman's Petty Cash Loophole

My understanding is Lieberman's spokesperson said the money went to pay "volunteers" that were doing field work to turn out the vote. But if they were paying people to do work, wouldn't they have to have records of it because they would have to file w-2 forms and withhold taxes for the employees?

by Pied Piper 2006-10-25 07:50AM | 0 recs