A draft opinion out of the Federal Election Commission suggests that money contributed to Democratic candidates through the ActBlue clearinghouse may not be eligible for public matching funds, because ActBlue is registered as a PAC.
However, ActBlue does not function like an ordinary PAC–it’s just a convenient way for individual donors to direct online contributions to different candidates.
This issue came up because John Edwards’ presidential campaign has opted into the public financing system for the primaries. He has raised more than $4 million on ActBlue. Some of that would not be matchable anyway (because only the first $250 from each donor can receive public matching funds), but a significant amount should be eligible for the matching funds.
For background on this issue, read this post by Kos.
Adam Bonin, an attorney who covers regulatory issues at Daily Kos, is sending this letter to the FEC on behalf of Kos and BlogPAC.
Neither Kos nor Adam B supports Edwards, but as Adam notes,
This isn’t about supporting the Edwards campaign — I’ve made my feelings clear on that subject. It’s about protecting ActBlue and the public financing system, and pushing for a legal regime which respects technological innovation. Please join us in this fight — you only have until noon on Thursday to submit comments.
I encourage you to read Adam’s whole post–it’s quite informative.
The Edwards campaign is making it easy for citizens to submit comments to the FEC on this issue. Check out this diary by Tracy Joan, who works for the campaign.
The non-profit group Public Campaign is urging people to contact the FEC as well. After the jump, I’ve posted the full text of an e-mail I received this morning from Public Campaign. Or, you can click here and go to the Public Campaign website, where you can add your name to the letter they are sending to the FEC.
Big money donors dominate the presidential race like never before, but the ability to give money online has put a new tool in the hands of campaigns and people who can make small or modest donations.
But this Friday, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is considering a ruling that would prevent some small-dollar donations given through the web from triggering public matching funds for candidates who have opted into the system.
Tell the FEC that small donors should have more influence in our elections — not less. Click here to sign this letter to the FEC making the case against such a ban.
This specific case concerns donations made to the presidential campaign of John Edwards through a site called ActBlue which directs funds to candidates. Out-of-date regulations — rules that the FEC is has proposed to keep — mean that donations made through ActBlue and similar sites wouldn’t count. Regardless of which candidate or party you like, we can all agree that if this rule stands, big money wins and regular people lose.
We can think of no better way to tell the FEC that regular people should count in politics than by submitting a letter with thousands of signatures from people like you. Click here to add your name to the letter.
The full text of the letter is at the end of this email.
We will deliver this letter, along with your signature, to the FEC by noon on Thursday so please act quickly to sign the letter now!
Thank you,
Nick Nyhart
President and CEOThis letter will be sent to the FEC before Noon EST on Thursday:
December 13, 2007.
Ms. Rosemary C. Smith
Associate General Counsel
Office of the General Counsel
Federal Elections Commission
999 E Street NW
Washington, DC 20463RE: Opposing Draft Advisory Opinion 2007-31
Dear Ms. Smith,
We, the undersigned, have added our names to this letter as online members of Public Campaign, a national nonprofit organization that advocates for and educates the public about comprehensive public financing of elections. We have joined together not in support of one candidate or another, but in defense of the bedrock American principle that all people should have a voice in politics regardless of their ability to make large donations to political candidates.
That’s why we write to urge the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) to reject Draft Advisory Opinion 2007-31, which would run counter to the general intent of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended, and the Presidential Primary Matching Payment Account Act. This matter was initially brought to your attention by the John Edwards for President Committee. The Commissioners’ decision, though, has an impact on candidates of all political parties who wish to participate in the presidential public financing system.
We believe campaign finance regulations ought to make it easier for small donors to participate and have their voices amplified in the presidential nominating process via matching funds. Draft Opinion 2007-31, before the FEC on Friday, December 14, 2007, does the opposite.
We oppose Draft Advisory Opinion 2007-31 because it would disqualify millions of dollars from tens of thousands of small donors from the presidential matching system only because they were donated through a website called ActBlue. In doing so, this proposed Advisory Opinion would codify an outdated regulation drafted and implemented before the Internet’s political potential was widely understood, let alone what it has become today: a fundraising, organizing, and democratizing force in American politics.
There were good reasons for the regulation when it was first implemented. The intent of this provision was to prevent individuals from evading contribution limits and/or to match additional monies in excess of $250 by donating through different conduits, including corporations. But this regulation was established at a time when the tracking of individual donations was relatively primitive compared to what advancements in technology allow for today. Today, committees like ActBlue and presidential candidates alike have reliable and auditable processes to track and monitor contributions in a far more automated, efficient, and accurate manner than what existed when the regulation was first implemented.
With elections placed increasingly more in the hands of big donors, there are larger issues at stake. One of the clear goals of the presidential public financing system is to encourage citizens to make small and modest donations to candidates, as well as to make outreach to these donors advantageous for presidential candidates. When the presidential public financing system was first adopted no one would have predicted that small donor fundraising would grow significantly through the pioneering utility of the internet. Nor would anyone have guessed that large contributions would come to dominate so much that the public financing system would be rendered mostly ineffective in stemming the tide of big money. Unfortunately, if the FEC adopts Draft Advisory Opinion 2007-31, it will further solidify the preeminence of big money in the presidential primary.
In closing, it is instructive to note that, under this proposal, a $250 contribution from an individual to a presidential candidate is eligible to be matched based on the sole criteria of what website the contribution was made through. That seems, to us, to be an antiquated application of an outdated regulation.
To help advance citizens’ voices in the presidential system, we urge Commissioners to reject the Draft Advisory Opinion 2007-31 and allow donations contributed online through committees like ActBlue to be eligible for matching funds.
Sincerely
Your Name