GOP campaign financing: Part 3

Photo credit: dailymail.co.uk

GOP campaign financing: Part 3 ~ Jeb!

Full disclosure: Conservative Treehouse (Sundance) is a blog that has come out in full support of Donald Trump. However, Sundance’s analyses of and reporting on other campaigns have been in depth and educational, especially when it is difficult to identify the donors. From an August 29, 2015 blog post:

It is always important to remember, in 2015/2016 there are two types of funds for each candidate now: traditional campaign finance (which has rules, laws and limits – albeit changed this year), and Super-PAC funding (no limits).

The campaign funding behind Jeb Bush falls primarily into the Super-PAC category, in this case, a Super-PAC called the Right to Rise Super PAC. 

From an earlier blog on August 16, Sundance reported that:

The Super-PAC [Right To Rise] that Jeb Bush constructed, well, Jeb and Tom Donohue, and Mitch McConnell and the Wall Street power brokers who planned the entire gig, prior to the announcement of his candidacy, have a plan.

And then comes the big question: “So who exactly is behind this Right To Rise USA Super-PAC?”

At least 20 individuals each wrote checks of $1 million or more to the super PAC. They include billionaire health care investor Miguel Fernandez, the group’s biggest donor; California billionaire William Oberndorf; Iranian-American diplomat Hushang Ansary and his wife Shahla; and hedge-fund manager Louis Bacon.

Right to Rise also got about 236 six-figure checks from several notable donors, including former Utah Gov. Jon Huntsman, Citadel Investment Group founder Kenneth Griffin and Houston businessman Robert McNair.  

Treehouse linked to a July 2015 Politico article that reported:

With help from two former presidents and hundreds of other wealthy Wall Street and K-Street donors, the pro-Jeb Bush super PAC raised a staggering $103 million in the first six months of the year.

The information at Treehouse and left-leaning Politico are consistent: Bush has the backing of Wall Street mega-financiers. The Bush campaign has been spending heavily on TV and direct mail. As of today, RealClear Politics shows Jeb is in 6th place (at 3.3%), behind Trump, Cruz, Rubio, Carson, and Christie.

For background on Chris Christie’s fund-raising, posted earlier on this blogsite, go here.

For background on Dr. Ben Carson’s fund-raising, posted earlier on this blogsite, go here.

# # #

IRS beats tea party in court: Jim Jordan calls out the decision

From Politico:  IRS Beats Tea Party in Court

By RACHAEL BADE | 10/23/14 3:23 PM EDT Updated: 10/23/14 6:39 PM EDT

The IRS may have inadvertently figured out how to win its legal battles against aggrieved tea party groups: Give them what they wanted in the first place — tax-exempt status.

That was a major reason a Republican-appointed federal judge on Thursday threw out two lawsuits brought by more than 40 conservative groups seeking remedies for being singled out in the tea party targeting scandal, a victory for the IRS.

Judge Reggie Walton of the U.S. District Court of the District of Columbia dismissed almost all counts brought against the tax-collecting agency in two cases, ruling that both were essentially moot now that the IRS granted the groups their tax-exempt status that had been held up for years.

Walton, a President George W. Bush-appointee, also said individual IRS officials could not be fined in their individual capacity for allowing such treatment because it could hurt future tax enforcement.

The ruling, which the groups could appeal, has serious implications for tea party groups suing the IRS, suggesting they may never receive compensation for the long waits they endured for a ruling on their status.

The inspector general report that ignited the targeting controversy last year found that applications sat in limbo for as long as several years and that the groups were asked inappropriate questions about their donors, political affiliations and random things like social media posts.

Republicans said they were outraged at Walton’s decision.

 “You get targeted and harassed for three years but, oh, because you finally get [tax-exempt status], the three years of harassment doesn’t mean anything?” asked Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio), who heads a congressional subpanel investigating the controversy. “I find that argument lacking tremendously in light of what these people went through.”

But others said the agency needs to do more — not less — to scrutinize nonprofit groups that don’t follow the rules and over-engage in political activities. To obtain the status in question, political activity must not be the groups’ primary activity — a vague and difficult-to-administer test.

“Judge Walton got it right — there is no ongoing injury to these groups,” said Paul S. Ryan [not the Rep.], senior counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, which backs tighter rules on political nonprofits. “The IRS needs to enforce tax law with respect to nonprofit political groups more aggressively.”

A furor erupted in May 2013, after a Treasury inspector general report blasted the IRS for using discriminatory labels to sort through applicants seeking tax-exempt status using terms like “tea party ” and “patriots."

Soon after a raft of right-leaning organizations that applied for tax-exempt status sued the government. Some had had their applications put on hold for years; others were asked what were later ruled inappropriate questions about donors and political views during the application process.

The groups in their suits alleged that the IRS violated their First and Fifth Amendment rights with the inappropriate “be on the lookout” list that used words like tea party to hold up their applications. They sought monetary relief for their trouble as well as injunctive relief barring the IRS from discriminating against conservative groups ever again.

The agency has since changed its practices, including scrapping the lists.

When the suits at hand were filed, 22 of the groups had already received their tax-exempt status, five had dropped their applications altogether and just over a dozen were still waiting to hear from the IRS.

Since then, the IRS had approved all but two, rendering much of the arguments moot, the judge said — and preventing him from considering the case.

“After the plaintiff initiated this case, its application to the IRS for tax-exempt status was approved by the IRS. The allegedly unconstitutional governmental conduct, which delayed the processing of the plaintiff’s tax exempt application and brought about this litigation, is no longer impacting the plaintiff,” Walton said in his decision to throw out True the Vote’s lawsuit against the IRS.

# # #