CIR: Money and Politics

Ad-ing it all up

Will Evans — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 11:12:33 -0800

The game is over. Some won, some lost, and a lot of people laid down their money. Scores of independent groups went into hyperdrive for this election, reaching millions of people with some of the most vicious attack ads of the year. We saw new groups pop up out of nowhere; we saw old groups go to unprecedented lengths to help their candidates of choice; and we saw organized labor, corporate America and the partisan wealthy flood them all with money. For the last few months, we've tracked their moves at the Secret Money Project. We hope our reporting helped illuminate the sometimes-opaque forces of influence, and serves as a resource in the future. While independent groups mostly stayed a sidenote during the campaigns -- particularly the heavily financed presidential contest -- they did leave their marks.

American Issues Project produced an ad in August that linked Senator Obama to one-time anti-war militant Bill Ayers. It kept Ayers in the mix as a campaign issue at a time when Sen. John McCain's organization wasn't ready to take that step.

At virtually the same time, the liberal Brave New Films made a viral video raising questions about McCain's multiple homes. The video led a print reporter to ask McCain about the real estate, and the candidate flubbed the answer, creating a new campaign issue.

The Clarion Fund inundated the presidential swing states with a DVD called "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West." It was a classic example of the murky space between campaigning and issue advocacy that many of these groups occupy. NPR listeners and npr.org readers told us about the DVD, and we give them our profuse thanks. All of them all told us the video seemed meant to promote McCain. As for the Clarion Fund, it hired a new public relations firm after we aired our broadcast story. But it never clarified its financing or activities -- as, indeed, it had no need to; the fund is a 501(c)(3) charity with minimal disclosure requirements. People speaking for the fund insisted there was no partisan agenda, and said they had distributed 28 million copies of the DVD in key election states only to attract the attention of reporters covering the race.

The biggest player among these groups was the Service Employees International Union, and sometimes it seemed to reach everywhere in the liberal establishment. And long before the election, SEIU had already budgeted $10 million to hold their favored candidates accountable to the union's agenda in 2009. But figuring out what impact the groups actually had on the campaigns is a tricky proposition. For one thing, the mish-mash of tax rules, campaign finance laws and Supreme Court decisions made it impossible to know precisely how much money they spent. We gave it a good try here, by adding together all the money that groups reported spending on election-related communications since July: PRESIDENTIAL RACE Conservative Groups: $40.9 million Liberal Groups: $53.1 million SENATE RACES Conservative Groups: $40.4 million Liberal Groups: $29.6 million This is a vast undercount, since many groups only have to report election ads that show up on TV or radio or that explicitly say to vote for or against a candidate.We recorded $4.2 million for MoveOn.org, for example, while the group engaged in plenty of other activities and said in a press release that it spent more than $30 million overall. Chalk it up to a system that, for better or worse, doesn't require vast amounts of election-related activity to be reported. Money, in any case, doesn't necessarily equal impact. Many organizations spent big on mobilizing their members and getting out the vote, and that counts for something. But what about those attack ads? All ads and groups are measured nowadays against the standard of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the 2004 group that wounded Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry's aspirations. Nobody achieved Swift Boat status this year, though some tried hard, on the left (Brave New PAC) and right (National Republican Trust and American Issues Project). Perhaps the media, which hyped the Swift Boat group in 2004, learned their lesson and avoided giving any attack too much credit, theorizes John Geer, an expert on negative advertising at Vanderbilt University. Tom Matzzie, a Democratic strategist, has his own diagnosis: that the Internet has made it too easy to fact-check dishonest ads. Conservative operative Chris LaCivita, who went from Swift Boat Veterans in 2004 to American Issues Project this year, says it was just money. He says AIP simply couldn't raise enough from big donors after Wall Street crashed. And maybe attack groups never got a direct shot at a candidate's core message. The Swift Boat ads took aim at Kerry's war record, which he was running on. But this year, when the economy became the main issue for voters, attacks on Senator Obama's nefarious "associations" or McCain's health seemed less relevant. Plus, Senator Obama buried McCain and his allies with the biggest pot of money ever spent on an election. "With Obama's fundraising advantage, all the 527s kinda got crowded out," Geer says. "We're going to go to a system where the next presidential candidates are both going to have to raise so much money...that all of the sudden these people who are funding these 527s have to think about whether it's worth putting their money down." An interest group's goal is not only to help a candidate win, but also to ingratiate itself with the politician or party, says Steve Weissman, of the Campaign Finance Institute. Even if labor unions and such groups as MoveOn.org and Planned Parenthood didn't necessarily tip the election to Senator Obama, they dedicated a vast amount of money and resources to his cause, and now can hope that he feels indebted to them. Let's take a look at who racked up some chits. (Click on the links to watch the groups' ads and read about their funding and leadership.) PRESIDENTIAL RACE **Liberal Groups** 1. SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION = $23,107,433 2. UNITED AUTO WORKERS = $4,860,571 3. MOVEON.ORG = $4,185,821 4. AFSCME = $2,312,723 5. PLANNED PARENTHOOD ACTION FUND = $2,096,495 6. ADVANCING WISCONSIN = $2,094,687 7. AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS = $1,997,375 8. PROGRESSIVE FUTURE = $1,496,323 9. SIERRA CLUB = $1,213,068 10. HEALTH CARE FOR AMERICA NOW = $1,132,085 11. NARAL PRO-CHOICE AMERICA = $1,117,991 12. DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE ACTION FUND = $1,021,241 **Conservative Groups** 1. NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION = $6,946,238 2. NATIONAL REPUBLICAN TRUST = $6,592,925 3. VETS FOR FREEDOM = $4,596,149 4. NATIONAL RIGHT TO LIFE = $4,504,422 5. LET FREEDOM RING = $3,257,939 6. AMERICAN ISSUES PROJECT = $2,878,873 7. REPUBLICAN MAJORITY CAMPAIGN = $1,851,120 8. FOCUS ON THE FAMILY ACTION = $1,332,862 9. RIGHTCHANGE.COM = $1,318,691 10. REPUBLICAN JEWISH COALITION = $1,267,002 11. COMMITTEE FOR TRUTH IN POLITICS = $1,192,510* 12. NATIONAL CAMPAIGN FUND = $1,167,810 *The total for the Committee for Truth in Politics is an estimate by the Campaign Media Analysis Group. The group argues in a pending lawsuit that it doesn't have to report its expenditures. The biggest spenders on the left were obviously labor unions. George Soros -- who made himself a political lightning rod by bankrolling anti-Bush groups in 2004 -- in this cycle gave $3.5 million to Fund for America, $1 million to America Votes, about half a million to other liberal groups, and that's all that we know of. Hollywood producer Steve Bing also spent $2.5 million on the Fund for America, and about a million more on other pro-Democratic groups. On the right, pharmaceutical executive Fred Eshelman apparently outspent Soros, dumping $5.5 million into his anti-Obama 527, RightChange.com. Other conservative megadonors include Texas businessman Harold Simmons, who gave $2.9 million to American Issues Project, and retired physician John Templeton Jr., who gave at least $2.7 million to Let Freedom Ring. In contrast, a few conservative political action committees were able to raise remarkable sums via strictly regulated small donations. The National Republican Trust, for example, reported spending an incredible $6.6 million on the election, despite being founded in September. Now, shifting to congressional races ... We set out to cover Senate races, figuring that several contests could be pivotal to the chamber's makeup next year, while the House was clearly destined to become more Democratic. Outside groups saw it that way too, and piled into Senate contests as the election drew near. Weissman says independent groups focused more on congressional races than in 2004. In some of the closest contests, outside groups with huge warchests had the potential to make a significant difference, he says. (See our chart of groups below.) And speaking of collecting chits, the pharmaceutical industry, under the guise of America's Agenda: Health Care for Kids, went so far as to spend millions on incumbents of both parties -- many of them in completely safe seats. Surely a good way to make friends in Congress. A popular strategy on the left was funneling union money through independent 527s to produce attack ads. Unions produced their own ads, but they also provided almost all the funding for Patriot Majority to blitz key Senate races. Union money flowed to Citizens for Strength and Security, Majority Action, Campaign Money Watch -- all of them 527s that report their contributions. On the right, this election cycle saw the creation of several new 501(c)(4) nonprofits, which don't have to disclose their donors, focusing on congressional races. High-powered examples include the Employee Freedom Action Committee and American Future Fund, as well as Coloradans for Economic Growth and American Energy Alliance. Freedom's Watch also fits the bill, though we know it's bankrolled by casino magnate Sheldon Adelson. Of course, Americans for Job Security has been doing this for years, and appears to be unfazed by a complaint to the Internal Revenue Service that it's violating its tax status. Weissman, in a recent report on independent groups, points to the increasing popularity of 501(c)(4) advocacy groups and 501(c)(6) trade associations on the right and the left as a major trend of this election season. "The impact," he tells us, "is that there's more ads out there that you don't quite know who's behind them." That's why we started the Secret Money Project, to help shed some light on the groups trying to influence your vote. We hope it's proved enlightening. -- Will Evans and Peter Overby SENATE RACES **Liberal Groups** 1. PATRIOT MAJORITY = $5,171,393 2. AMERICA'S AGENDA: HEALTH CARE FOR KIDS = $4,403,124 3. SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION = $2,662,464 4. CAMPAIGN MONEY WATCH = $2,357,409 5. AMERICAN RIGHTS AT WORK = $2,300,049 6. LEAGUE OF CONSERVATION VOTERS = $1,626,664 7. NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION = $1,328,032 8. AFSCME = $1,291,950 9. CITIZENS FOR STRENGTH AND SECURITY = $1,163,352 10. ALLIANCE FOR A BETTER MINNESOTA = $1,077,453 11. MAJORITY ACTION = $1,025,276 12. PLANNED PARENTHOOD ACTION FUND = $1,016,052 **Conservative Groups** 1. U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE = $13,251,304 2. FREEDOM'S WATCH = $5,577,688 3. AMERICANS FOR JOB SECURITY = $5,279,833 4. EMPLOYEE FREEDOM ACTION COMMITTEE = $3,528,389* 5. AMERICAN FUTURE FUND = $1,610,238 6. NATIONAL FEDERATION OF INDEPENDENT BUSINESS = $1,307,147 7. CLUB FOR GROWTH = $1,122,889 8. NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION = $1,079,801 9. AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION = $922,000 10. AMERICA'S AGENDA: HEALTH CARE FOR KIDS = $879,660 11. AMERICAN ENERGY ALLIANCE = $777,092 12. COLORADANS FOR ECONOMIC GROWTH = $670,562 *The Employee Freedom Action Committee's total is an estimate by the Campaign Media Analysis Group, since the group didn't have to file government reports on its expenditures. For example, the group ended its ad campaigns in Senate races just before the reporting requirements clicked in. Its ads after that didn't mention candidates by name, again avoiding filing requirements. METHODOLOGY: We compiled our totals using Federal Election Commission filings by groups on their independent expenditures (messages explicitly advocating the election or defeat of a candidate) and electioneering communications (broadcast ads mentioning a candidate close to the election). Our starting date was July 1, the beginning of the first month after the presidential primaries ended. When an organization had an affiliated PAC, 527 and 501(c)(4), we added all the money together. We also combined the spending of unions and their locals, as well as national groups with their state affiliates. When a group reported one bulk expenditure for presidential, Senate and House ads, we tried to approximate the split. Our totals are certainly an undercount. Here are some reasons why: Massive voter mobilization efforts aren't counted. Some groups may have not reported independent expenditures, claiming they didn't expressly advocate for a candidate. Some other groups appeared to tailor their campaigns to avoid reporting requirements. Even with the numbers we do have, some groups filed inaccurate or incomplete reports. So don't take this as a full accounting, but rather a window into the world of independent groups, given the level of transparency that we currently have. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Fat lady hasn't sung in Georgia

Will Evans — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:24:30 -0800

And you thought you were done with political ads on TV. Well, not if you're in Georgia. Because Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) seems stuck below the 50-percent mark in Tuesday's balloting, the race under state law seems destined for a December run-off. Freedom's Watch doesn't have much going on these days, and it isn't wasting any time. The group—which, depending on how you see it, either failed to fend off Democratic takeovers in Congress or succeeded in preventing worse Republican losses—has a new ad trashing Jim Martin, the Democrat challenging Chambliss. "Jim Martin says he's a champion of lower taxes," the ad says. "I guess that must have been another Jim Martin who criticized a $100 million tax cut plan for Georgia families ... His evil twin maybe? Or just the same old tax-and-spend Martin policies." Both candidates also bought air time for their own ads. And so it continues ... This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

What they don't want you to know

Will Evans — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:17:52 -0800

Now that it's over, we can look back and ponder which independent groups might have had an impact on the election, which attack ads left a mark, and who might have blown millions of dollars. But there's at least one group that doesn't want us to know anything. It's in court, suing to strike down the disclosure requirements that tell us who runs ads near an election, how much gets spent and, sometimes, who puts up the cash. The Committee for Truth in Politics was launched by a North Carolina Republican operative in late September, and spent $1.2 million on anti-Obama ads. Here's one that criticized Obama's abortion stance and another that falsely accused him of supporting early release for sex offenders. The ads aired in the midst of the general election campaign, but the committee hasn't reported anything about them. We know only because we subscribe to the Campaign Media Analysis Group, which has developed a sophisticated system to track ads on TV and estimates how much they cost. The committee, represented by Republican lawyer extraordinaire James Bopp, argues it shouldn't have to reveal a thing. Bopp has sued the Federal Election Commission, arguing that what the group spends on ads is none of the government's, or the public's, business. "We believe that the U.S. Constitution protects them from having to file that report," says Bopp. "The problem is having to file a report at all. To be regulated at all. To be accountable to the government at all." Bopp is building on his success in a Supreme Court case last year that struck down a critical campaign finance regulation. As the law stands now, there are two basic kinds of election-related ads that require disclosure to the government and the public: Those that explicitly advocate for the support or defeat of a candidate (independent expenditures) and those that don't go that far but identify a candidate close to the election (electioneering communications). The Supreme Court, ruling last year on a Bopp lawsuit known as Wisconsin Right To Life, overturned some restrictions on the second kind of ads, so they can now be financed with corporate or union money. Bopp argues that if an ad doesn't fall into the first category, it's not truly related to the election. Therefore, it doesn't fall under the purview of the FEC. Tara Malloy, of the Campaign Legal Center, begs to differ. Her organization is filing amicus briefs in support of the FEC. Malloy says that even if the Supreme Court ruled against funding restrictions for electioneering communications, those ads are still about the election. Besides, she says, the court has upheld disclosure rules that have nothing to do with elections -- like lobbying disclosure regulations. "This is just sort of wishful thinking on the part of Bopp," she says. It's also worth noting that the Supreme Court in 2003 let stand the restrictions on electioneering ads. That was when it ruled on the McCain-Feingold law -- but it also predates the court's latest ideological shift and Bopp's Wisconsin case. Rules saying who can or can't pay for an ad are harsh, and need to be weighed with extreme care, Malloy acknowledges. But rules for public disclosure are the "least restrictive type of campaign finance regulation," so they should face a lighter level of scrutiny, she argues. The Supreme Court, she says, has determined that disclosure in general is important for three reasons: to prevent corruption, to inform the electorate "and thereby ensure the integrity of the government," and to tell us what's happening so we can gauge if further regulation is needed. "Most people, when they see an ad critical of a candidate shortly before an election, they are going to assume it has something to do with the election," Mallow says. "It would be very helpful for the citizen to know who's funding it, what their interests might be." Bopp, on the other hand, makes an analogy to prove his point. What if, he says, journalists had to tell the government every time they wrote a story mentioning a federal candidate? What if they had to report which candidates they named, who published the story and who paid for it? "Bottom line -- that's the reason they wrote the First Amendment, to protect both citizens and the press from this sort of government regulation." Bopp has appealed the Committee for Truth in Politics case to the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals. And he's got others pending. "The mushrooms are cropping up everywhere," as Malloy says. Keep an eye on that Supreme Court docket. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

And they keep coming ...

Will Evans — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 15:39:42 -0800

Independent groups are vying to get in the last word before the election's over, so we'll try too. Here's a litte potpourri of last-minute efforts... And it doesn't get more last-minute than this: Vets for Freedom just busted out with a TV ad today, airing in Pennsylvania and Ohio, channeling some veterans' anger at Obama. The ad (below) starts out talking about Dwight Eisenhower and some letters he wrote and how Obama only wrote one letter, except that's a metaphor...but the real message is that Obama only saw failure in the courageous efforts of Iraq War veterans. It ends with a spoof of one of Obama's slogans, saying, "Can we win our war? Yes we can." Meanwhle, RightChange.com picked up a star of Republican Big Money: Bob Perry, the mega-donor who gave millions to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004. Perry gave $100,000 to RightChange's campaign against Obama and in defense of Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC). It's somehow reasuring to know that Perry isn't slacking off this election season. Progressive Future, which we already profiled, put up an anti-McCain ad on cable that's more about mood than message. It shows images of people struggling with the economic downturn set to Paul Simon singing, "I don't know a soul who's not been battered..." When Simon gets to the lyrics, "I wonder what's gone wrong," the ad ends up on a Bush-McCain hug. Missouri Right to Life, the state affiliate of National Right to Life Committee, launched an emotionally charged anti-abortion ad against Obama. The ad features Jill Stanek, an Illinois nurse who became an anti-abortion activist when she discovered babies that survived botched abortion being left to die. Stanek leads her own group, Born Alive Truth, which also produced anti-Obama ads. In this ad, Stanek says Obama was "unmoved" by her story and "thought that infanticide was acceptable." Because he voted against "born alive infant" legislation in the state senate, Stanek says, "His opposition was responsible for living babies being left out to die." A similar claim by Stanek's own ad was criticized by Factcheck.org. Good thing ads are repeating the same claims these days, because otherwise there wouldn't be time to fact-check them before polls close. Born Alive Truth, for its part, just received $75,000 from Norm Miller, a born-again Christian businessman who chairs a Dallas company with this mission: "To glorify God as we supply our customers worldwide with top quality, value-priced batteries, related electrical power-source products, and distribution services." Meanwhile, Focus on the Family Action continues to pump money into airing Born Alive Truth's ad, running it on the radio in Indiana and on TV in Colorado and Florida. And now for everyone's favorite "black-belt patriot," as he calls himself: Chuck Norris. In a National Rifle Association ad running in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia and on cable, Norris says, "If some thug breaks into my home, I could use by roundhouse kick. But I prefer he look down the barrell of my gun." Norris, who supported Mike Huckabee in the Republican primaries (check out this ad) tells us to protect our rights, and beware of anti-gun politicians who pretend to support those rights. Norris apparently thinks he's a candidate -- he delivers the "I approve this message" line, while standing in front of a house that has a sign reading, "We don't dial 911" over a picture of a gun. Norris then delivers one of his famous punches at the camera, as the voiceover says, "Just let 'em try and outlaw those guns." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

The union of politics and telemarketing—what's not to like?

Will Evans — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 11:47:53 -0800

Robocalls—those recorded, automatically dailed phone messages—have been lighting up phones everywhere the past few days. Nobody seems to like getting them. Some are inocuous—the standard fare of campaigns and candidates. But then there are underhanded, unaccountable calls meant to confuse voters. For example, calls have been going out into Virginia and Pennsylvania telling people to vote tomorrow, on Nov. 5, according to Jonah Goldman, director of Election Protection at the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights. Goldman says he doesn't know who's responsible, but similar misleading messages are being distributed via email, Facebook and flyers, often targeting young and minority voters. A third kind of robocall comes from independent groups trying to influence your vote. The Republican Jewish Coalition, for example, is sending anti-Obama robocalls to Jewish voters. The call quotes Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) saying that Obama lacked the "political courage" to leave Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church. The RJC labels the United Church of Christ congregation "anti-Semitic" and "anti-American." The call hammers home the point with this: "If Obama doesn't have the courage to do the right thing here at home, can he stand up to dictators and tyrants who seek to do us harm? We should all be concerned about Barack Obama." The National Political Do Not Call Registry tracks all sorts of robocalls—and lets you report them. Christina Perkins, of eastern Virginia, told us she got her first robocall last week, and was a bit taken aback. The call, she says, started out asking if she is a registered voter, without identifying who wanted to know. The second question, "Are you pro-life?" struck Perkins as "sort of out of left field." She answered, "No," to which the robocall replied by saying that Obama would "raise your taxes by almost $3,000." Does that change your mind about Obama, the call asked? Perkins said, "No," and the message concluded by saying the group that sponsored it was in support of John McCain. Perkins couldn't remember the exact name of the group, but we traced it back to Christian conservative leader, one-time presidential hopeful and former Reagan advisor Gary Bauer. Bauer, who heads Americans United to Preserve Marriage and the group American Values, hired ccAdvertising to do the calls in Virginia, said his spokeswoman, Kristi Hamrick. Hamrick said Bauer also ran some get-out-the-vote radio ads in battleground states. Hamrick said she wasn't sure which Bauer organization paid for the robocalls But it appears to be Americans United to Preserve Marriage. In 2004, Americans United to Preserve Marriage ran ads attacking Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry and a Democratic Senate candidate on gay marraige. The biggest donors for that effort were Tom Ward and Aubrey McClendon, founders of the Oklahoma City-based Chesapeake Energy Corporation. They're also in the group of investors that bought the Seattle SuperSonics basketball team and turned them into the Oklahoma City Thunder. Ward, a billionaire who now heads another oil and gas company, gave Bauer's group an additional $50,000 at the end of last year. The group also got $50,000 from developer Jeffrey Armour last year and another $50,000 from attorney Jeffrey Czech this August. Both Southern Californians, they each gave $1,000 to Bauer's 2000 presidential campaign. Armour also gave $75,000 to the anti-gay marraige intiative on the California ballot. ccAdvertising, the firm hired by Bauer, has the capacity to make 3.5 million phone calls every day, and is operating in nearly every state on behalf of its clients, says chief operating officer Jason Flanary. Clients include Common Sense Issues and the Alaska Republican Party as well as McDonald's and Starbucks. Flanary and ccAdvertising's president, Gabriel Joseph, spun off a separate political action committee in September, called Americans in Contact, which does pro-McCain robocalls. The calls ask voters their preference for president. If the voter says Obama, the robocall plays two "education components," which say that Obama will raise taxes and received campaign contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, according to Flanary. If the voter answers McCain, the call asks for donations to the PAC. The goal, Flanary says, is to "identify conservatives around the country and to engage them in the political process." As for the Gary Bauer call, Christina Perkins says, "I was irritated, just because I would have liked to know up front who was calling. After the first question, it became immediately apparent there was an agenda that was being pushed, which is irritating. I have my number on the no-call list for a reason." Too bad. She's now had several robocalls since that first one. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Advancing Wisconsin with national money

Will Evans — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 11:24:42 -0800

With all the new groups that we've seen shoveling money into high-profile TV and radio ads, it's easy to overlook the outfits working to influence the election while staying below the radar. Advancing Wisconsin is one of those low-visibility operations, and it's getting bankrolled by national pro-Democrat groups. A 501(c)(4) formed in May, the group does phone calls, mailers and door-to-door canvassing to help elect Obama. It spent $435,000 in the last week and $1.9 million this election season, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Mike Tate, the executive director, knows that many groups like his fade away after the eleciton. But his fellow organizers are determined to form a "permanent grassroots field-organizing infrastructure in Wisconsin," he says. In the future, the group plans to advocate around the state budget and state supreme court races. This idea of an eternal, localized political structure is a hot one among Democrats and liberals. Similar organizations exist in several other states, and big donors are looking kindly on them. How kindly? Advancing Wisconsin got $230,000 earlier this year from Fund for America, a group funded most notably by George Soros and organized labor. Fund for America was supposed to be a centralized funder for liberal groups, but disbanded in June. Another $650,000 arrived in Advancing Wisconsin's coffers this fall from America Votes 2006. The umbrella group America Votes was organized in '04, to coordinate voter mobilization against President Bush, and continues to operate. America Votes 2006 (stay with us here; this is how a lot of American politics is financed) recently received $500,000 from both Rockefeller heir Alida Messinger and Chicago publisher Fred Eychaner, and a combined $250,000 from brother-and-sister billionaires Jon and Pat Stryker, heirs to the Stryker medical techonology company. America Votes 2006 also picked up $200,000 each from Getty Oil heir Anne G. Earhart, Steelcase office furniture heir John R. Hunting and Peter B. Lewis, chair of Progressive Insurance. Lewis historically has been one of the financial stalwarts of the Left. But back to Advancing Wisconsin. Mike Tate, the director, was state director for Howard Dean's fervent-but-short try for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2004. Dean now heads the Democratic National Committee. Tate was also Wisconsin's deputy director for America Coming Together, a pro-Democratic get-out-the-vote operation in 2004. Advancing Wisconsin's program and campaign manager is Meagan Mahaffey, previously director of the Wisconsin Democratic Party (and before that with America Coming Together and Dean). The operations director is Awais Khaleel, who was a college student superdelegate at the presidential convention and a member of the Democratic National Committee. (Tate says Khaleel gave up the DNC seat before working on Advancing Wisconsin's campaign.) All in all, this Wisconsin group's leadership has pretty strong connections to the national Democratic Party apparatus and those who help to underwrite it. No wonder Advancing Wisconsin is well funded. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Blue ads in red territory

Will Evans — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 11:14:55 -0800

Eugene Hedlund acknowledges that when Hollywood and New York filmmakers prepare political ads to target Middle America, they can spark a "backlash." So the self-described former Republican voter's political action committee, TruthandHope.org, teamed up with Hollywood and New York filmmakers to let Middle America speak for itself. The PAC, founded to support Democrat Howard Dean in his unsucessful 2004 presidential campaign, is running a series of ads spotlighting Obama supporters in solid Republican country -- all of them ordinary folks speaking straight to the camera. Each ad runs in the area where it was shot-- a strategy that produces its own kind of backlash, with the Obama advocates taking heat from their neighbors. Several ads in southeast Missouri focus on Darrell Hanschen, who runs a small pharmacy in Jackson, MO. He talks about health care ("Let's get somebody in there who cares about someone who walks the street of Jackson") and taxes ("Joe the Plumber makes more money than any plumber that I know of"). Here, he talks about a friend who's weighing whether to vote for "the black guy." Hedlund says one of the doctors in town said he'd never give Hanschen any more business. "These guys have stepped out in red areas, but we're trying to circle the wagons to give 'em some support," said Hedlund. Whenever someone like the pharmacist has a problem, Hedlund sends out an alert to his fundraising list, and supporters send messages of solidarity or sometimes even offer financial support, Hedlund said. Hedlund is a California mortgage banker who says he supported John McCain in the 2000 primaries and George Bush in the general election that year. The ad buys are all pretty small, but they add up to about $110,000 in all. In other ads: 81-year-old World War II vet Jack Moore of Nixa, MO, shows off his gun collection and says, "No way will Obama take my guns away." Dana Snodgrass, a small business owner in Joplin, MO, says, "I don't think George Bush and Republican Party truly care about the common people." A guy who repairs rock-crushing equipment in Nevada says, "We've already had the guy we'd like to have a beer with ... What we need now is the smartest guy." And a veteran in Columbus, OH, says he voted for McCain in 2000, but "I wouldn't do that today." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Big bucks let freedom ring

Will Evans — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:57:34 -0800

We know that Let Freedom Ring is one of the most active anti-Obama organizations this election. It's spending millions of dollars on a seemingly infinite supply of new ads. And now we know who's bankrolling the massive effort. Benefactor number one is John Templeton Jr., who is also chairman of Let Freedom Ring. He plunked down $2.7 million so far. He may have given more, for activities the group doesn't have to report. Templeton, whose father was a famous investor, was a co-chair of the faith and values steering committee of unsuccessful Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney. A born-again Christian, he's also one of the biggest donors to a ballot initiative in California this year that would ban same-sex marriage; he and his wife gave $1.2 million. Some of Templeton's other gifts this year: $776,000 to the College Republican National Committee, $550,000 to the Republican State Leadership Committee and $200,000 to the Club for Growth. Let Freedom Ring also received $500,000 in September from Virginia James aka Virginia Manheimer, a school voucher activist and donor. James is also a co-founder of the Club for Growth, which she gave $700,000 this year. "Smaller" donors to Let Freedom Ring include Foster Friess and Nathan Bachman, who each gave $100,000. Friess is a sucessful Wyoming investor who formerly served as president of the Council for National Policy, an umbrella group for the religious right. Friess explains his opposition to Obama via YouTube. Bachman is an Ohio investor who gave $10,000 to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004. And here, below, is a sample of what that money buys: an emotional "Best Of" compendium of conservative complaints against Obama: Rev. Wright; Bill Ayres; Tony Rezko; "clinging" to guns and religion; contributions from Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae; ACORN; and taxes and spending. Let Freedom Ring put up the ad on TV this weekend. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

"The culture of death" and other last-minute volleys

Will Evans — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:37:07 -0800

With the campaign din becoming ever more shrill in these last hours, opponents of Barack Obama are hoping an anti-abortion message can cut through to sympathetic voters. The National Pro-Life Alliance put up this ad in New Mexico, targeting both Obama and the Democratic candidate for Senate, Rep. Tom Udall. The ad recounts an incident in which two teenagers dumped their newborn baby in a Dumpster. It occurred 12 years ago in Delaware. The urgently delivered voiceover likens it to partial-birth abortion, and notes that Udall and Obama "voted to continue this grisly procedure." The group used identical language in Senate ads as far back as 2000. The Virginia-based alliance started in 1993 partially in response to the election of Bill Clinton, and now has 600,000 members, said its president Martin Fox, a Catholic priest in Ohio. The group is currently pushing legislation that would overturn Roe v. Wade. Common Sense Issues, which pushed for Mike Huckabee during the Republican primaries and then backed out of the presidential race, recently jumped back in with an ad attacking Obama on abortion. Running in the newly competitive states of North Dakota and Montana, the ad shows footage of Obama saying that the question of when a fetus gets human rights is "above my pay grade." That line has become one of Obama's biggest faux pas, seized upon by pro-life activists. The ad includes an interview with Bernard Nathanson, a former abortion doctor and founding member of what is now NARAL Pro-Choice America, who became an outspoken anti-abortion activist in the 1970s. He calls legalized abortion "the greatest mistake this nation has ever conceived." Family Research Council Action's PAC launched an ad in Virginia, with a more bipartisan approach. It quotes the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan, a respected Democrat, as saying partial-birth abortion is "too close to infanticide." The ad contrasts that with Obama, who it says voted against a ban on the practice. "The culture of death has a good friend in Barack Obama," it says. FRC PAC also has radio ads supporting Republican senators in Mississippi, Kentucky and Georgia (listen here). And today, on the eve of election day, FRC Action placed this anti-Obama ad in eight Ohio newspapers. Pro-choice forces are active as well. Planned Parenthood and NARAL Pro-Choice America each spent more than $200,000 in the last week, mostly on mailers, phone calls and canvassing for Obama and other Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. Then again, National Right To Life spent more than half a million in the last week to help McCain and other Republicans. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Catholics can't vote for Obama?

Will Evans — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:32:00 -0800

Retired Texas Bishop Rene Gracida says that Catholics cannot, in good conscience, vote for Obama. Now, in a last-ditch attempt to derail Latino support for Obama, an anti-abortion crusader and anti-illegal immigration activist have teamed up to blast out Gracida's message by email to nearly three million Latino voters and reaching even more people by radio. Randall Terry, the aggressive anti-abortion organizer who founded Operation Rescue, says it was his idea. He enlisted Gracida, who made national headlines in 1990 by excommunicating three Catholics for assisting with abortions. In 2004, Gracida gave a special benediction for the Republican National Convention. In the English-language version of his anti-Obama message, Gracida says, "A Catholic cannot be said to have voted in this election with a good conscience if they have voted for a pro-abortion candidate. Barack Hussein Obama is a pro-abortion candidate." You can hear the Spanish version here. Terry called the email blast "a blockbuster because Obama is desperate to take the Hispanic vote." He told us the emails went to "2.9 million Hispanic voters" as well as "100,000 whites." He corrected that to "100,000 Americans," then quickly said that didn't sound quite right either. He said he hasn't had much sleep, due to this last-minute effort. RightMarch.com provided financial and logistical support for the campaign, buying a bit of radio time in Ohio, and procuring the massive email list to reach Latinos. RightMarch's president, William Greene, made illegal immigration his top issue last year, when he lost a special election for Congress in Georgia. A fundraising letter of support for Greene from the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps PAC (which we profiled here) described Greene thusly:

Bill has been a leader in the fight against illegal immigration as a grassroots activist, delivering millions of messages to Capitol Hill from constituents, demanding NO AMNESTY for illegals;

He has personally mustered with us on the U.S.-Mexican border as a volunteer with the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, standing watch to report the illegals streaming unhindered across our officially undefended Arizona border;

Bill has helped us to raise tens of thousands of dollars for MCDC operations and projects, such as the Border Fence Project...

He has pushed hard for congressional bills to de-fund pro-illegal immigration groups like the ACLU and La Raza, to take away their ill-gotten gains stolen from the pockets of unwilling and unsuspecting taxpayers. Terry said radio hosts are picking up the Bishop Gracida ad and broadcasting it for free. Some individuals are paying for airtime themselves, he said, and one businessman in Ohio paid for a TV version of the ad. "The glory of this is that it's free," Terry said. "It's viral!" This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Ads hit McCain in home state, Obama in Florida

Will Evans — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 10:24:45 -0800

Arizona is McCain territory -- he's made his home there since 1982 -- and losing it to Barack Obama would sting. So it's no wonder MoveOn.org wants to make that happen. With Obama's campaign gearing up in the state, the liberal group joins in with this TV ad, showcasing a Republican vet who is voting for Obama. Obama's homestate of Illinois isn't really in play, so his foes are hitting him where it will hurt most. The Republican Jewish Coalition extended its ad buy in Florida with a $104,000 donation from David Kaufman, a Connecticut businessman who runs an eye care center. It's down to the wire, folks, so this is your last chance to lay down $100k for the cause! Whichever cause that might be. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

GOP Trust PAC gets on the air

Will Evans — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:17:09 -0700

The National Republican Trust PAC is finally putting some advertising muscle behind all its claims about being able to beat Obama. The group yesterday laid down $880,000 on an ad buy, pretty big for an insta-PAC created last month. We earlier blogged that the PAC was spending more on fundraising emails than actual airtime, but this completely changes the calculation. You know you're bigtime when Factcheck.org dedicates a full article to debunking your ad. National Republican Trust got that distinction this week, with the added bonus of being accused of producing "one of the sleaziest false TV ads of the campaign." The PAC even pumped out another ad, again accusing Obama of wanting to give government benefits to illegal immigrants, with a cherry on top: Obama "wants to redistribute your money." It's the Republican attack point of the moment, with only moments to spare. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Swift Boat donor defends Mitch McConnell

Will Evans — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:12:07 -0700

Swift Boat Veterans founding donor Bob Perry is funding a new 527 organization, but this one is a lot less expensive. The First Amendment Alliance is airing radio ads against Democrat Bruce Lunsford, who is in a tight race with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). Perry, a Texas developer, gave $50,000 this month to the group. He's better known for giving $4.4 million in seed money to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which helped to defeat John Kerry in 2004. The Alliance is run by political consultant Anthony Holm, who doubles as Perry's spokesperson. Holm's consulting firm includes other connected Republicans, such as the daughter of Sen. John Cornyn (R-TX). He told us in a phone interview that he has done work in the past for Vice President Dick Cheney. Holm serves as the Alliance's only director. He said he didn't have time to share more information about the Alliance or its ads. The group, which was formed last year, also received $75,000 from the holding company of Mischer Investments, another Texas real estate developer. The company was built by the late Walter Mischer Sr., a longtime Houston powerbroker. A third donor was Connecticut investor Jonathan Farber, who gave $20,000. Farber's private equity firm invests in the oil and gas industry. This isn't Bob Perry's only project. Also this year, Perry gave $750,000 to the Republican Governors Association, $650,000 to the Club for Growth, and $100,000 to the College Republican National Committee. Overall, though, Perry didn't take to federal 527s like he did in 2004. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

RightChange gets money from controversial businessman

Will Evans — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:08:22 -0700

RightChange.com's blitz of anti-Obama ads has been bankrolled mainly with more than $5 million from pharmaceutical executive Fred Eshelman. But this month the 527 organization diversified: it put out a new ad (below) supporting Republican Sen. Elizabeth Dole in its home state of North Carolina. And it reported receiving $100,000 from a controversial businessman named R. Craig Estey. In trying to figure out who Estey is, we found some interesting background. Estey runs a chain of gambling parlors in Nevada called Dotty's. He also operated one of the biggest video gambling operations in Oregon until the state lottery ran him out of town. In December 2006, Oregon Lottery Director Dale Penn wrote Estey to terminate his state lottery contract because "you do not satisfy the requirements of good character, honesty, and integrity that apply to all Lottery Retailers." It all started with a domestic dispute Estey had in 2005, when he allegedly held a gun to his then-wife's head and threatened her life. Gaming officials from Nevada looked into it. The Gaming Control Board said that Estey initially lied to its investigators before admitting his wife's version of events. He eventually agreed to a $200,000 fine from the Nevada Gaming Commission. The Oregon State Lottery eventually found out about the case from a newspaper columnist. Because of the incident, the lying and the fact that Estey didn't notify Oregon officials of his problems, Penn wrote that "your continued association with the Oregon Lottery poses a threat to the actual or apparent integrity, fairness and security of the Lottery and is not consistent with the public interest, convenience and trust in keeping with the sensitive nature of the Lottery." We tried to contact Estey through his lawyer on Wednesday but Estey hasn't responded. He sold his Oregon company last year but is still operating in Nevada. And now, Estey is venturing into the not-quite-ended 2008 campaign. View ads from RightChange here. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Uppercase or lowercase—big difference

Will Evans — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:44:52 -0700

Let Freedom Ring is putting a lot of money behind its current kitchen-sink blast of anti-Obama ads. Attention must be paid. The latest in the freedom-ringing fusillade shows Obama saying he will not develop new nuclear weapons and will "slow our development of future combat systems." The footage is from what the ad calls an "Obama campaign-produced solicitation video" from last October. Notice that the ad uses the lowercase form for "future combat systems," implying that Obama wants to slow development of all combat systems. McCain has used the same line against Obama. But as the Army Times and the libertarian Cato Institute point out, Future Combat Systems -- uppercase -- is a specific military program that McCain also has opposed. In any case, the ad segues to Reagan appointee Frank Gaffney, who says that leaders who convey an unwillingness to use military might show weakness to "our enemies" and "weakness invites agression." Gaffney's dead-serious monologue also featured in the gaffe ad starring Joe Biden. Joe the Gaffer makes another appearance in an extended version of the ad (also on TV), with his much-publicized prediction that "it will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

McCain-Palin: The nightmare before Christmas?

Will Evans — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:40:20 -0700

At some moment in the last month, Danny Elfman had an idea. It wasn't another creepy soundtrack to another Tim Burton film. It wasn't a reunion tour with his old band Oingo Boingo. It was, rather, about his "greatest fear": President Sarah Palin. In no time, Elfman and followers formed a political action committee, a Web site (OurGreatestFear.org) and a political ad now doing a small run in Ohio and Pennsylvania. "This is the story of one person who was feeling really frustrated and demoralized and thought, 'You know what? I'm going to do something about it,'" said Sheila Shirazi, who is handling press for Elfman's group. In the ad, a voiceover suggests John McCain may die in office, as his face morphs into that of Palin, the White House in the background. Our greatest question, though, is why no spooky music? Elfman, after all, scored such movies as Beetle Juice, Edward Scissorhands, Nightmare Before Christmas, and even creepier ones like Pee-Wee's Big Adventure. And besides, it's almost Halloween. But no. Those hoping for a dark and twisted soundtrack to the election will be disappointed. Explains Shirazi, "Danny's actually a fairly modest person. I think that he really wanted this to be about the message. He didn't want anything to take away from it." Elfman supposedly plans to continue his PAC to focus on other candidates in future elections. We can't help but recall all the musical cliches in political ads, and hope Elfman can get over that modesty thing. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Reagan endorses Obama! Or not ...

Will Evans — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:34:14 -0700

Okay, so Ronald Reagan isn't around to actually endorse anyone. But that won't stop political operatives from invoking his presidency to boost their candidate. A new, liberal Colorado-based group called Progressive Future is bringing back the Gipper to put in a plug for Obama, while the conservative Let Freedom Ring calls Obama the "anti-Reagan." Progressive Future's ad, airing in Florida and Ohio, starts off with footage of Reagan delivering his powerful rhetorical question of the 1980 debate against Jimmy Carter: "Are you better off than you were four years ago?" (One of the strategists who came up with the line later modestly called it "probably the most devastating line Mr. Reagan used against Mr. Carter." The strategist was writing a column hoping that John Kerry wouldn't use it with success against President Bush.) The ad continues with Reagan's speech, set against images of Dick Cheney, Osama Bin Laden, rising gas prices, a home foreclosure, and, crucially, Bush together with John McCain. Reagan says, "If you don't think that this course that we've been on for the last four years is what you would like to see us follow for the next four, then I could suggest another choice that you have." And just as he mentions "another choice," there is Obama set against a giant American flag, gazing off into the distance at those Reagan Democrats he needs on Tuesday. Obama himself played off the line last week at a Florida rally, saying, "At this rate, the question isn't just 'Are you better off than you were four years ago?', it's 'Are you better off than you were four weeks ago?'" But Obama isn't running against an incumbent, as Reagan was. McCain aired his own ad saying, "We're worse off than we were four years ago," distancing himself from Bush's legacy. Let Freedom Ring -- as part of an endless stream of new ads, some on TV and some Web-only -- tries to cast some of Reagan's glow on McCain instead of Obama. This new video calls Obama the "anti-Reagan" and says to McCain, "Your economic policies are the policies of Ronald Reagan." We already dug up the background on Let Freedom Ring. Now let's take a look at Progressive Future and its dizzying array of affiliated groups. Progressive Future is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit founded last year at the urging of Doug Phelps, chair of US PIRG and its umbrella organization, the Public Interest Network. US PIRG is itself an umbrella for state-level public interest research groups that got started by Ralph Nader decades ago. Progressive Future is also part of the Public Interest Network, along with Green Corps. The network also includes Environment America, which is busy campaigning for Obama and Democratic Senate candidates like Al Franken in Minnesota and Mark Udall in Colorado. (Environment America is -- hold on to your hat -- itself an umbrella of state-based groups.) Okay, zoom back in to Progressive Future. It was formed to foment a grassroots activist base on issues like universal healthcare, alternative energy and an end to war in Iraq, says program director Adam Lioz. "The Right had been out-organizing the progressive side" and it was time for that to change, said Lioz, who came from US PIRG. This long-term grassroots approach is a hot strategy among liberals. In a story on independent groups that aired on Morning Edition today, organizer Tom Matzzie called it one of the success stories of the 2008 election cycle. Progressive Future's board of directors includes Pete Maysmith, who used to be at Common Cause; Mo Kirk, who works for the Public Interest Network and used to be at Oregon State PIRG; and Naomi Roth of Work for Progress. The group is now active in Colorado, Florida, North Carolina, New Mexico, Nevada, Ohio, Virginia and Wisconsin, according to Lioz. Earlier this year, it joined with yet another network of liberal groups, called Progress Now (which we profiled here) to form Progress Florida. Which brings us to this blog's humble plea to liberal groups. Please -- please -- can you just form one network and stick with that one? It would be a lot less confusing. Please? This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Union power—more than meets the eye

Will Evans — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 17:09:08 -0700

Organized labor is in the mail, on the airwaves and on the streets for Obama and other Democratic candidates. And there's even more union activity underneath the surface. Besides their own ads and massive get-out-the-vote campaigns, which we detail below, unions are bankrolling the attack ads of several other advocacy organizations. Here are some new disclosures:

Citizens for Strength and Security, which is advertising against Sens. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) and Roger Wicker (R-MS), recently got $700,000 from the United Food and Commercial Workers Union. The 527 also got $100,000 from an affiliated group, Citizens for Safety and Security, which in turn was funded by the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the Laborers' International Union of North America (LIUNA). With the influx, CSS jumped into the Louisiana Senate race with a new ad against Republican challenger John Kennedy.

Campaign Money Watch, running ads against McCain and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) just got $300,000 from the Association of State, County and Municipal Employees (AFSCME).

Patriot Majority, running ads against Dole, Wicker and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA), just reported a $1.65 million haul from AFSCME, in addition to $1.5 million from the union earlier in the month, not to mention even more before October. The United Auto Workers, meanwhile, announced radio ads supporting Democratic Senate candidates. And SEIU just launched a $425,000 ad buy in Ohio accusing McCain of supporting tax breaks for companies that move jobs overseas. (Factcheck.org calls this line of attack misleading.) The ad features a Dayton, OH, former factory worker whose job, she says, was shipped to China. "I was Meghan the Factory Worker, " she says, mimicking the McCain campaign's favorite mascot, Joe the Plumber, "and John McCain's votes on outsourcing haven't helped me one bit." And then there's the massive union ground game. The AFL-CIO announced: "Beginning Saturday, tens of thousands of AFL-CIO volunteers will visit more than 3.9 million union households, make 5.5 million calls and distribute more than 2 million leaflets at worksites through Election Day." AFSCME has 40,000 members out trying to mobilize voters. LIUNA plans to spend $15 million on the election, more than twice what it spent in 2004. The National Education Association sent more than 21 million mailers and made more than 2 million calls to members in battleground states. And on and on and on, with a GOTV effort the Democrats count on every two years.

Parting shots from the Left

Will Evans — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 15:30:00 -0700

It's the final push, folks, and they're pushing hard. Here's a wave of liberal ads hoping to unseat Senate Republicans -- and a video representation of Republican fear. People for the American Way rolls out TV ads criticizing Republican senators for supporting "judges who hurt our families." The ads say that Susan Collins of Maine, Norm Coleman of Minnesota, John Sununu of New Hampshire, Gordon Smith of Oregon and Elizabeth Dole of North Carolina "stood with George Bush and helped put his extreme nominees on our nation's highest court." Here's the one about Collins, who is the group's focus: Patriot Majority continues to batter Republican incumbents and continues to receive giant bundles of union cash. Recent ads include one accusing Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) of siding with "corporate interests and one faulting Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) for supporting free trade agreements. Another takes on Dole, saying, "They know us as Tar Heels for standing our ground. But when Elizabeth Dole votes with George Bush 92 percent of the time, the ground starts to crumble." The ground-crumbling metaphor is aided by a visual in the ad. Patriot Majority reported getting $1.5 million from AFSCME this month, as well as $125,000 from the Teamsters and $25,000 from Patricia Bauman, who is president of the liberal Bauman Foundation and board member of Catalist, a data-mining firm that works for Democrats. It's enough to drive Freedom's Watch crazy. The conservative group has been one of biggest players running ads to stem the onslaught of Democratic Senate candidates.(Here's a recent one taking on Jeff Merkley, who's challenging Smith in Oregon.) In a video to be e-mailed to the Freedom's Watch rank and file tomorrow, you can feel the fear of the nightmare scenario: a filibuster-proof Democratic majority. The dark and ominous video takes aim at Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY), head of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, calling his "reckless policies" the cause of current economic woes. It warns that the DSCC is "spending nearly $100 million on a smear campaign funded by special interests." It continues, "A filibuster-proof Senate means unchecked power to pass their tax increases, their pork-barrel spending, and no ability to block activist judicial nominees." And the capper: "Too much power in one party's hand is too risky for America." The irony of the last line -- since it was merely two years ago that voters ended six years of one-party GOP rule by giving congressional majorities to the Democrats -- is only surpassed by the sense of frustration, just days before the eleciton. There are even more liberal Senate ads -- silly and serious. Let's get the serious ads out of the way: Citizens for Strength and Security, a North Carolina-based 527, is branching out to Mississippi. Here, it blames Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) for helping to send jobs overseas and increase our debt to China, similar to the Republicans-sell-us-to-China ads we blogged on yesterday, from Truth From American Workers. This new one blames Wicker for supporting "unfair trade deals" such as NAFTA, even showing a fake billboard that reads, "Senor Wicker, Gracias por NAFTA." Also on the serious side, VoteVets brings its battleworn ad on body armor to Georgia to see if it will work against Chambliss. Now for a little levity, and we use the word loosely. The League of Conservation Voters' radio ad in New Hampshire proposes some sarcastic slogans for Sununu's campaign, all in that bombastic announcer tone that we know so well. For example, "John Sununu. Using your tax dollars to make the filthy rich richer." The silly part comes when the ad starts trying to rhyme Sununu (think mumu or booboo). Not the lightest touch ever in a political ad, but at least there's no ominous synthesizer music. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Trust in small business, not Obama

Will Evans — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:45:19 -0700

It's sort of like a reverse coattails effect. A pro-business political action committee is running ads boosting vulnerable Republican senators by contrasting them with Obama. In fact, the spots seem more like anti-Obama ads than ads supporting pro-business Republicans, as they are billed by the Trust in Small Business PAC. The cookie-cutter ads start out saying "Barack Obama's endless promises guarantee a huge expansion of federal programs, paid for with tax increases on the back of small business." Gloomy images of shuttered shops give way to a vibrant businesses and triumpant music as the ad says, "Vote for a proven friend of small business." Those proven friends are Sens. John Sununu (NH), Elizabeth Dole (NC), Mitch McConnell (KY), Roger Wicker (MS), Saxby Chambliss (GA) and Louisiana Senate challenger John Kennedy. You can watch all of the ads here. The PAC, which aired ads in 2006 Senate races, is run by Mari Rusch, who used to be national finance director for the National Federation of Independent Business. NFIB is also running ads in close Senate races. The Obama-is-bad-so-Republican-is-good message may have some traction in states like Louisiana and Mississippi, rated "Solid GOP" for McCain by NPR's Ken Rudin. But maybe not so much in New Hampshire, which is "Leaning Democrat" for Obama. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Latest campaign boogeyman: China

Will Evans — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:40:58 -0700

Maybe "McChina" would have sounded better. Reaching back to the 1970s for its rhetoric, a Kentucky-based labor group is sounding the alarm that John McCain and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell are selling us out to "Communist China." A radio ad from a 527 group called Truth From American Workers features the voice of Chris Sanders, general counsel of United Food and Commercial Workers Union, Local 227. "Wall Street's in trouble because George Bush and Mitch McConnell pulled the regulators off Wall Street so the tycoons there could speculate, with our money," he says. "And we're deep in debt, again, to Communist China no less." Three other radio spots imitate the quick-fire babble of an auctioneer who is auctioning off U.S. manufacturing jobs and government debt. China is the top bidder. In Ohio and Indiana, the ads blame McCain: "Tell John McCain to stop sending our jobs and our dollars to China. We need them around here." In Kentucky, a different version of the ad blames McConnell. Listen to all four ads here. Truth From American Workers' treasurer is Larry Fox, another official from Local 227. The group's leadership also includes representatives from the United Mine Workers and a Teamsters Union local, but UFCW seems to be the overriding connection. UFCW and its locals gave the group $170,000, more than any other entity so far. The group used to be called Working Families for Kentucky, but changed its name in September. Funny thing about that: Working Families for Kentucky was formed -- just last year -- to oppose Bruce Lunsford in the Democratic primary for governor. Lunsford did end up losing that primary, and you might recognize his name. He's the Democratic challenger to McConnell, the guy the unions now want to unseat. For old times' sake, here's the anti-Lunsford ad the group produced in 2007. You won't see it on TV in Kentucky.

Clarion DVD now circulated by religious right group

Will Evans — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 14:25:23 -0700

Remember the Clarion Fund and its DVD, "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against The West"? The DVD -- and the fund's murky background -- caused an uproar when Clarion spread 28 million copies of the disk throughout battleground states, all in the name of attracting media attention. Now the DVD has a new distributor, a California-based publication called The Judeo-Christian View. Where Clarion's roots traced back to Israel, the View connects to significant figures in the conservative Christian political movement. It pulls "Obsession" closer to being precisely what the Clarion Fund has insisted it is not: a political message delivered at the peak of a presidential campaign. The View says it mailed "Obsession" and other materials, discussing Barack Obama's and John McCain's views on abortion, homosexuality and other issues, to more than 325,000 clergy earlier this month. Its conclusion is that Obama's views are "at odds with the ancient Biblical faiths." The View's general publisher is O'Neal Dozier, once a linebacker for the New York Jets and Chicago Bears, now pastor of the Worldwide Christian Center in Pompano Beach, FL. The publisher is Gary L. Cass, who's also head of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission, where the homepage currently offers "7 Reasons Why Barack Obama Is Not A Christian." Dozier is active at the crossroads of religion and Republican politics, meeting with President Bush four times in 2005, in delegations of African-American clergy. When Jeb Bush, the president's brother, was governor of Florida, he appointed Dozier to one of several state panels that recommended judicial nominees. But he removed Dozier in 2006, after the pastor called Islam a "cult" during a radio interview and judicial candidates said he asked them inappropriate questions. Republican Charlie Crist, who followed Bush as governor, initially put Dozier on his campaign's Strengthening Florida's Families advisory group, but then dismissed him after the "cult" comment and some other remarks. Dozier earlier was involved in Freedom Watch, a group set up by Judicial Watch founder Larry Klayman (and not to be confused with Freedom's Watch, a well-funded conservative group active in this year's campaigns). Cass said he, not Dozier, is the proprietor of The Judeo-Christian View. He told us the big mailing was done this month "to take advantage of interest in the political season to launch" the publication. And to deepen the mystery over how "Obsession" is distributed, Cass was vague as to how his publication acquired DVDs for the mailing. He said they came from Clarion but declined to say if they were purchased or contributed. Referring to Clarion, he said, "Let's just say we have a good working relationship with them." Cass's Christian Anti-Defamation Commission claims an advisory board with some stars of the Christian Right: Lou Sheldon, founder of the Traditional Values Coalition; Don Wildmon, founder of the American Family Association; and Steve Baldwin, executive director of the Council for National Policy, a little-known but well-placed umbrella group for funding and policy on the religious right. The Judeo-Christian View mailing includes "Obsession," a second video presentation and two documents. The video is a sermon titled "Same-Sex Marriage and Child Sacrifice" (Dozier's term for late-term abortions) and discusses Obama's views in detail. It also briefly mentions McCain. There's a "mild" version of the video sermon -- -- and an "adult graphic version," which you can find here. The documents are essentially text versions of the video sermon. One says of Obama, "We contend that on these paramount issues of natural marriage, family and children, his policies are at odds with the 4,000-year-old, Judeo-Christian view; instead, they would move America further down the low road toward paganism...." They also say that by accepting homosexuality, an Obama presidency would inflame Islamic radicals, who would hate America even more for condoning homosexual relationships. And just in case, the packet includes clickable links to Web pages that guide a religious leader through the tax code limits on political speech by tax-exempt religious organizations. For Michael Mumme, a United Methodist pastor in Woodsboro, TX, the "polemical" and partisan content of the mailing was a big turn-off. "In a sermon it just wouldn't fly, in a mainline denomination, to refer to either political candidate and their views," Mumme told us. "It could happen in certain churches. But most of the time, regardless of who wins the election, Christians need to be advocating on behalf of 'the least of these' whether it's a Democratic administration or a Republican one." Cass said reaction to the mailing has been mixed. If it has an impact, that will be evident this Sunday, with the last regular church services before Election Day. —Peter Overby and Will Evans This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

MoveOn money behind the curtain

Will Evans — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:48:08 -0700

"Paid for by MoveOn Political Action" appears at the end of only one TV ad these days, but MoveOn.org is involved in more behind the scenes. MoveOn, for example, gave $583,000 to bankroll Health Care for America Now's recent ad hammering McCain's health care policy. MoveOn also gave $400,000 this month to Campaign Money Watch, which recently ran an ad against Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and today has a new one taking on McCain. (Private equity billionaire Jerome Kohlberg, a long-time advocate for campaign finance reform, also pitched in $130,000.) The new CMW ad, aimed at conservative viewers in Florida, Virginia and on national cable, spotlights McCain's penchant for gambling and his contributions from the gambling industry. Here's a Las Vegas Review-Journal story on the subject. The ad starts by comparing McCain to "celebrities" who "love to gamble" like Paris Hilton and Britney Spears. It's a sarcastic allusion to a much-discussed McCain campaign ad comparing Obama to the pop stars. It may seem a bit odd that an organization dedicated to the public financing of elections would go after McCain, the only candidate who actually decided to take public financing for his campaign. Obama's explosive fundraising, meanwhile, is being blamed by some for the imminent demise of the system. But David Donnelly, director of Campaign Money Watch, explained to us a while ago, "Our view is that the current system is broken. Candidates are going to fund their campaigns in whichever way they think will bring them to victory." For Donnelly, the question is, "Which candidate has pledged to make fixing the presidential system a priority?" His answer: "Obama has." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Anti-Obama ads, amid an onslaught of emails

Will Evans — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 11:07:29 -0700

Every election season, some independent groups sizzle with controversy and impact, and others fizzle. We couldn't tell at first, but the National Republican Trust PAC appears to be of the sizzling variety. The political action committee -- founded by a trio who have tried to prove a link between Saddam Hussein and the Sept. 11 attacks -- has new anti-Obama ads on the air and a fundraising machine in overdrive. One ad dredges up inflammatory comments by Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and the other says Obama wants to give driver's licenses and government benefits to "illegals." A fundraising email today said the group has raised $1 million for its "emergency effort to stop Barack Obama" and seeks $1 million more for the campaign's final week. The email promises, "Almost all of our net dollars raised -- after marketing costs -- are going directly into our ad war against Obama." That phrase "after marketing costs" is significant. Of $903,000 in expenditures against Obama reported this month, about 56 percent, or $507,000, went to paying for fundraising emails like the one we just mentioned. Media buys and production accounted for 39 percent, or $356,000. The rest, $40,000, went to advertising, direct mail and phone calls. Peter Leitner, the group's treasurer, told us, "There's a lag in reporting. We're spending a large amount of money on the media buys...The biggest ticket item is the airtime." Here's the Rev. Wright ad, which says, "For 20 years, Barack Obama followed a preacher of hate." This ad (below) reprises the PAC's first one, which tied Obama's support for driver's licenses for illegal immigrants to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. This ad continues with the immigration theme to say, "Obama's plan gives illegals social security benefits and raises taxes for his health care plan to cover them. Who pays? You do." All the ads are stamped with the slogan, "Barack Obama. Too Radical. Too Risky." The fundraising emails go even further. Another one sent out today says, "Barack Obama is not simply a risky choice as our next president -- he is a dangerous one." Far from only asking for money, the ever-flowing emails blast out the message too: "Doesn't he remember what happened on 9/11? More than 3,000 Americans were murdered. Doesn't he want to prevent that from ever happening again? If he supports driver's licenses for illegals, the answer is clear." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

I'm not endorsing, but vote for him anyway

Will Evans — Tue, 28 Oct 2008 10:56:13 -0700

On his latest Focus on the Family Action radio broadcast, evangelical leader James Dobson says, "While I will not endorse either candidate this year...I can say that I am now supportive of Senator John McCain and his bid for the presidency." With Dobson's definition of "supportive," who needs an endorsement? Dobson was reading from his October newsletter, which goes out to millions and lays out his reasons for supporting McCain and, even more vigorously, opposing Obama. Also on the radio recently, Dobson said, "I want our listeners to know that I have never, never been so concerned about the state of our nation," pointing to the willingness of many voters to elect "a leader, Barack Obama, who supports and will promote the most radical and unconscionable forms of abortion and policies that will result in many, many more babies dying." Before that, Dobson dedicated another broadcast to talking with two women behind Born Alive Truth, a new 527 airing anti-Obama TV ads. Focus on the Family Action itself recently spent $112,000 airing a radio version of the ad in stations across Colorado. Now that's "supportive." The abortion issue is at the top of the Planned Parenthood Action Fund's agenda as well, but the group has so far kept the debate out if its ads, even as it attacks McCain and running mate Sarah Palin. Planned Parenthood's newest ad (below) focuses instead on the group's own study ripping apart McCain's health care plan. Airing in the Washington D.C. market, which covers Obama-friendly Northern Virginia, it features a nurse calling the McCain plan "bad medicine." And yes, Planned Parenthood did endorse Obama. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Even the advertiser calls ad 'bizarre'

Will Evans — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 16:21:23 -0700

Usually advocacy groups avoid spending money on attack ads against politicians they can't beat. But the brand-new 2020 Action Fund, challenging Republican Sen. Jim Inhofe in deep-red Oklahoma, is in it for the long haul. Even the spokesman for the Boston-based group calls its new ad "borderline bizarre." The bizarre starts with a metaphor: old stock footage of a guy kicking another guy in the rear, repeatedly. The ad blames Inhofe for opposing energy independence, good wages and jobs. Then comes an impressionistic collage of images including a spinning globe, a man eating something, flying dollar signs, some sort of parade and money grabbed from a table. Words appear on the screen saying "15 Months $2 Trillion...Gone From Your Pensions." Get it? That's Inhofe doing the kicking, and Oklahoma taking it. The ad's punch line: "Kick back, Oklahoma." It's far from clear in the ad, but the 2020 Action Fund is dedicated to opposing politicians who get in the way of climate change legislation. The number one target: Inhofe, who, as ranking Republican on the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, has railed against global warming concerns and called the problem a "hoax." The 2020 Action Fund was incorporated this month by Brooke Coleman, whose other roles include founder of the Northeast Biofuels Collaborative, the New Fuels Alliance and the Renewable Energy Action Project. You get the picture. The group is a 501(c)(4) with a related 510(c)(3) called the 2020 Project. Another 2020 Project campaign is FoodPriceTruth.org, which gets financial support from the biofuels industry and defends ethanol against a "smear campaign." The 2020 Project was founded by Coleman, as well as Miles Cooley and William Kheel. Cooley is a California lawyer who is also on the board of the John Burton Foundation for Children Without Homes and the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights. Kheel is a media consultant who has worked for the organizations of a relative, famed labor lawyer Ted Kheel, as well as corporations like Motorola and Walt Disney. "We are concerned about the direction of the country," Coleman told us. The 2020 Action Fund wants to reduce the country's dependence on petroleum, but from a different angle than most environmentalists. Since climate change is "abstract" to most people and it's hard to wage political war on the issue, the group aims to target politicians on whatever issues they are vulnerable -- all in the unsaid name of renewable energy and a sustainable future. Check out the group's Web site on Inhofe and there's nary a mention of the environment. "You don't pay a real steep price for voting against renewable energy credits," Coleman says. "We want to be part of the price. We want to play in election time and we want to play when climate change [legislation] comes up in 2009. We're not going to do the people that we're targeting any favors." The group plans to monitor progress on climate change in 2009, draw up a list of the main "obstructionists" and target the top culprits for the 2010 eleciton cycle. For now, it's Inhofe. But the group doesn't have any illusions about defeating him. "We're not really in this to beat him," Coleman says. "We're in this to announce our presence." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Promoting an ethnic wedge issue

Will Evans — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 16:16:24 -0700

A Republican Latino group with ties to the Bush Administration is airing radio ads alleging that Obama puts African Americans before Latinos and Africa before Latin America. The 527 group, Latinos For Reform, is new this month and now it's running a Spanish-language ad in Pennsylvania and Colorado. The ad translates, in part, as:

Barack Obama a friend of the Latino community? The record demonstrates the opposite. Did you know that after the 2000 census that showed a tremendous growth of Latinos in Chicago, Obama told reporters in Chicago that while everyone agrees that the Hispanic population has grown, they cannot expand by taking power from the African-American community. You heard right...but there's more. Did you know that Obama has never hired a Latino to a senior position in his office throughout his legislative career? Did you know that Obama has opposed trade with Mexico, Central America and Colombia, yet supports free trade with Africa?

The chairman of Latinos For Reform is Robert Deposada, who has served in the leadership of the Hispanic Business Roundtable and The Latino Coalition, and was formerly director of Hispanic affairs for the Republican National Committee. In 2001, President Bush appointed Deposada to a commission to advance the administration's plan for privatizing Social Security. The treasurer of Latinos For Reform is high-powered Republican lobbyist Juan Carlos Benitez, whose firm brags that he "has exceptionally close ties to the White House." Benitez was a Pioneer -- he raised more than $100,000 for the 2004 re-election campaign -- and President Bush named him special counsel for immigration-related unfair employment practices. Benitez also raised between $50,000 and $100,000 this election cycle for McCain. In a press release, Deposada voiced frustration that McCain hasn't put enough effort into courting the Latino vote. "The lackluster and severely underfunded effort to promote Senator McCain among Latino voters needs an urgent bolt of new energy if the Arizona senator is to win the general election," he said. Apparently Latinos For Reform hopes to be that bolt. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

The cameraman always wins

Will Evans — Sat, 25 Oct 2008 16:12:54 -0700

Why do people assault cameramen? Don't they realize they have cameras? It's a continuing mystery, as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce uses one angry-man-versus-cameraman confrontation to blast union-friendly legislation and the Democrats who support it. The new ad, airing in states like Minnesota and Oregon with key Senate races, shows footage of Kentucky AFL-CIO President Bill Londrigan with his hands all over someone's camera, threatening, "I'm going to take this camera and stick it somewhere where you don't want it." The ad is meant to suggest that workers could face this kind of treatment from "union bosses" -- if Senate Democrats can enact a bill that would let workers simply sign a petition to unionize a workplace, rather than hold a secret-ballot vote. Londrigan was reportedly not amused. The Chamber is in the midst of its biggest election-season effort yet, committing some $35 million to help pro-business candidates in House and Senate races. A big part of the campaign focuses on opposing that pro-union bill, called the Employee Free Choice Act. (It's awkward to oppose "free choice," so one business group re-names it the "Employee FORCED Choice Act," helpfully retaining the orginial acronym.) A top issue on Election Day? Hardly. It doesn't even make this list in those "top issues for voters" polls. But it's a huge issue to the business community, which is busy trying to sell it as something voters need to care about. We've had the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace pound away against the legislation. And the business-backed Employee Freedom Action Committee has raised $20 million and is spending it on TV ads. (Here's the action committee's latest.) Americans for Job Security also got into the act with new ads targetting the Act. All of groups are using the issue against Democratic candidates in hot Senate races. Meanwhile -- perhaps ironically? -- the AFL-CIO just launched a multi-state radio campaign "urging citizens to vote and telling them how to be prepared to protect their vote on Election Day." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

From 'oops' to on-air in five days

Will Evans — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:51:52 -0700

How long does it take to go from gaffe to attack ad? Five days, based on our most recent example. You'll recall that on Sunday, Democratic VP candidate Joe Biden said, "Mark my words. It will not be six months before the world tests Barack Obama like they did John Kennedy...Watch, we're gonna have an international crisis, a generated crisis, to test the mettle of this guy." Biden is famous for flubs, and this seems to be his biggest during the general election. Or as the New York Post put it, "JOE D'OH PUTS O IN 'CRISIS' MODE." So that was Sunday. Already McCain, Palin and conservatives have rubbed it in Obama's face. And now, Let Freedom Ring has launched an ad in battleground states with the audio of Biden's remark. It starts running tomorrow and will eventually be up in Nevada, Ohio, Colorado, Pennsylvania and the pricey Virginia-Washington D.C. market. The ad also features Reagan appointee Frank Gaffney arguing, on something of a tangent, that "weakness invites aggression." It's guaranteed that Biden didn't look as happy as he does in the ad when he realized the impact of his gaffe. But let's not put all the blame on Biden. One of Obama's most memorable "oops" moments -- in a remarkably similar setting -- was when he told a group of supporters at a San Francisco fundraiser last winter that some small town voters "cling to guns or religion" because they are "bitter." Let Freedom Ring lets Obama relive that moment over and over, with an ad (below) featuring some bitter, small town Pennsylvania voters. Guess what? They're all voting for John McCain. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Electioneering by hypnosis in Oregon

Will Evans — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:47:01 -0700

The Democrats have figured it out. The key to defeating Sen. Gordon Smith (R-OR) is hypnosis. How else to explain these similarly transfixing anti-Smith ads from two liberal groups? The Service Employees International Union offers a spinning kaleidoscope of money, symbolizing the "deep dark hole" of the economy. Add ominous music, show Smith's face; then bring back the kaleidoscope, cue the feel-good chords and show Smith's competition, Democrat Jeff Merkley. In Youtube format, you can watch again and again! If that didn't work, try this: 30 seconds of water spiraling down the drain, countesy of Patriot Majority, a union-funded 527 trying to defeat Smith because he's "draining the middle class." Then the words on the screen dissolve into water and spiral down too....woah. For the full effect, we suggest playing both ads at the same time. A new ad from the League of Conservation Voters seeks to attach Demcratic candidate Merkley firmly to Obama's coattails. After all, Merkley's like a back-up musician to Obama the rock star, or support staff to Obama the head chef, or a teammate to Obama the point guard. Hey -- they're LCV's metaphors, not ours. Desperate for an anti-Merkley ad? Americans for Job Security has your back. The group's ad says Merkley's solution for economic crisis is big government spending and the elimination of logging jobs. Plus, Oregon is lost in some kind of time warp: the facts cited in the ad toggle back and forth between 2003 and 2007-08. Personally, we think the ad would be more effective if everything were spinning. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Sure, the economy is important, but...

Will Evans — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:43:44 -0700

Abortion, religion and judges -- oh my! Move over, economy, the culture wars continue. The Judicial Confirmation Network's most recent ad says it best: "Fixing the economy is crucial, but..." But? Yes, but what? "But America's principles and Constitution are threatened by one more liberal activist vote on the Supreme Court." The $250,000 ad buy goes out to Pennsylvania, Ohio and northern West Virginia. On the other side of the spectrum, Winning Message Action Fund bashes McCain-Palin for wanting to overturn Roe v. Wade. The action fund recently sprang forth from NARAL Pro-Choice New York. The dramatic ad shows women lining up for mug shots, some cringing with the flash of a camera, going to jail because they had abortions after the practice was made illegal. (Generally, it should be noted, anti-abortion legislation mandates prosecution for the doctors, not the women.) The ad airs in Wisconsin and Ohio. How often does one of these independent groups ask what effect its ads have on you? The Matthew 25 Network does that on its Web site, where you can find its latest radio ad "to share with Christians the faith that is the source of Obama's hope." The Web site says, "If this ad has blessed you, please donate here to help us keep it on the air." The ad is mostly audio clips from an Obama speech about his faith -- in fact, the same speech that other groups carefully edited in order to attack the Democrat. You don't have to give us any money, but let us know -- are you feeling blessed by any political ads these days? This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Alan Keyes' revenge

Will Evans — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:40:17 -0700

Think of it as a rematch. In 2004, Alan Keyes -- the Christian conservative activist and perennial long-shot candidate -- lost the Illinois Senate race by a landslide to a state senator named Barack Obama. Now, as Obama runs for president, Keyes is the presidential nominee of America's Independent Party (which sees John McCain as too liberal and the Keyes campaign as an "extension" of the 2004 race against Obama.) Obama certainly doesn't face much of a challenge from Keyes' candidacy, but separately two former top Keyes campaign officials are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars through a Keyes-founded political action committee to defeat Obama. The Life and Liberty PAC, an anti-abortion organization, has spent nearly $700,000 since February on phone calls, direct mail and canvassing against Obama. The group's chair is Mary Parker Lewis, who served as Keyes' chief of staff for his presidential runs in 1996 and 2000, and his treasurer in the 2004 race against Obama. Life and Liberty's chief financial officer is Bill Constantine, who was treasurer for Keyes' 2000 run and is listed as assistant treasurer for the 2004 race. Constantine said that though Keyes founded the PAC, he isn't currently involved. "The issues haven't changed," Constantine told us. "The reasons Barack Obama was bad for Illinois are the same reasons he's bad for America." Life and Liberty PAC is just one component in a cluster of groups linked to Keyes. Keyes, Lewis and Constantine also head up the Keyes-founded Declaration Foundation and affiliated Declaration Alliance, which has spent millions on the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps, a project that includes patroling the border for illegal immigrants. The constellation of organizations include several political action committees that are blasting out direct mail pieces against Obama. The Declaration Alliance Minuteman Civil Defense Corps PAC, for which Lewis is treasurer and Constantine is listed as a contact, spent $72,000 in the last two months criticizing Obama. Constantine says the committee "has really gained more speed since Sarah Palin joined the McCain campaign." Before Palin, he said, there wasn't any "distinct difference" between the candidates on immigration. The group's mail is done by the Richard Norman Company, a popular direct-mail contractor among Republicans, which did work for Keyes' 2004 campaign as well as Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The more simply named Declaration Alliance PAC also reported spending $15,000 against Obama. Another related committee, the Minuteman PAC, spent $95,000 in opposition to Obama since September. Yet another Keyes effort, RenewAmerica, has sent out recent newsletters calling Obama's campaign "Stalinist" and tying him to a "communist terrorist," aka the prime minister of Kenya. Back when Keyes was fighting Obama for the Senate seat, he would send out attack points called "The Daily Obamanation." Obamanation was defined as "the act of saying something to a target audience with the sole purpose of currying favor, while in fact having acted in direct opposition to the expressed idea." One of the pieces accused Obama of supporting sex education for kindergartners. Sound familiar? Another called him "The Criminals' Best Friend." Yet another said Obama supported infanticide. For Keyes' former aides, there should be plenty of material to recycle for the 2008 election. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

A tour of Senate ads

Will Evans — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 19:30:28 -0700

Our business here is to monitor indie political groups and their ads, and business has been good. Advocacy groups haven't run out of money. The bad news? They've run out of ideas. Two new North Carolina ads follow story lines we've heard over and over before (not that that's a bad way to influence voters -- it just makes the blog more boring). Here's one from Freedom's Watch, blaming Democratic Senate candidate Kay Hagan for jacking up taxes. Our takeaway: She wants to tax candy?! Next, Americans for Job Security denounces unions that want to take away secret ballots in union elections. "Hagan's on their side, not ours," the ad says, as an armored truck speeds out of Washington, presumably delivering union cash to Hagan. Watch the ad here. There's a virtually identical ad targeting the Democrat Ronnie Musgrove in a Mississippi Senate race. Moving along to New Hampshire... Labor unions (those bad guys from the last ad) are piling on to Sen. John Sununu (R-NH) by, predictably, tying him to President Bush. The distinguishing factor? The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees uses a rope metaphor (we're at the "end of our rope") and the Service Employees International Union uses a country-store cash register gimmick. We don't have the AFSCME ad in blogable format, so you'll have to trust us. Here's the SEIU ad: Now follow us to Minnesota for a breath of fresh ideas... Here's a theme we haven't seen before in the battle between Sen. Norm Coleman and Democrat Al Franken: guns! The National Rifle Association features a host of people concerned or angry at what they think Franken would do to their gun rights. They even get in a subtle jab at Obama: "I don't want 'change' when it comes to my Second Amendment rights." Moving back down toward Georgia, we stop over in Kentucky. Campaign Money Watch has a confusing ad faulting Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) for allegedly using his considerable "clout" against the public's interest. It's confusing because after blaming McConnell for blocking lower prescription drug prices and supporting the privatization of Social Security, the ad ends by asking us to "tell him to stop opposing Fair Elections Now Act." Say what? It's less confusing if you know that Campaign Money Watch is part of a group that advocates for public financing of elections, and the Fair Elections Now Act would do that. Is this ad an admission of the obvious, that people care more about pocketbook issues than public financing? And finally, Georgia. In a sign that the Senate race is tightening, Freedom's Watch comes to the rescue of GOP incumbent Saxby Chambliss with an ad (below) boosting him for fighting to lower taxes. Freedom's Watch isn't really known for mushy thank-you ads (see North Carolina above) but then again, NPR political editor Ken Rudin still says the race "leans Republican." If it gets closer, then Georgians will likely get more negative ads. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Teachers come around to Obama

Will Evans — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:11:56 -0700

John McCain is "more of the same" and "not really in touch," while Barack Obama "gets it." That's the message for eight battleground states, in a $2 million radio ad campaign by the American Federation of Teachers. It wasn't always such a love affair between the teachers union and Obama. During the presidential primaries, AFT gave $400,000 to the American Leadership Project, which ran ads backing Hillary Clinton and attacking Obama. That 527 also switched to a new target: McCain. The AFT ads are running until the election in Florida, New Hampshire, New Mexico, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia and Wisconsin. They are tailored to each state by featuring the voices of local teachers and school staff saying -- sometimes showing off their regional accents -- why they think Obama is the best choice. In the New Mexico ad, someone shouts in Spanish, "Adelante Obama!" The voices attest to "tough times" and people "struggling." The voiceover at the end says some version of "Barack Obama will make education a priority, jumpstart our economy and put middle class families first again." You can listen to one or all of them here. The AFT represents 1.4 million people and is headed by Randi Weingarten, who is on the executive council of the AFL-CIO and on the Democratic National Committee. The union also helps fund American Rights At Work, which has run ads targeting Republicans in Senate races this year. The other teachers' union, the National Education Association, stayed neutral in the primary contest between Obama and Clinton, but endorsed Obama for president as soon as the primaries ended. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Citizen Tim takes on Obama himself

Will Evans — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:08:32 -0700

The one form of political advertising that's completely unregulated and free is the speech of an individual citizen, even when money amplifies that speech by putting it on the airwaves. Tim D'Annunzio, who describes himself as a "concerned North Carolina businessman," is doing just that. The former defense contractor has produced four several hard-hitting ads against Obama with now-familiar themes: Taxes, Abortion, Rev. Wright and Bill Ayers. The only ad we know is running on TV (below) hits Obama on taxes. In it, D'Annunzio says he was living below the poverty line a decade ago, but built his company, Paraclete Armor & Equipment, into a workforce of hundreds. He says Obama's "promised tax increases will devastate people like me, by taking more than half of my business profits. This will force me to cut jobs and increase prices." A former Army parachute jumper, D'Annunzio founded Paraclete to make body armor for the military and law enforcement. It provides equipment for troops in Iraq and Afghanistan and makes millions from defense contracts. The company received more than $26 million in federal contracts since 2001, mostly from the Air Force, according to the government database USASpending.gov. About $2.6 million of the contracts were awarded without competition. In addition, in 2006 the company recevied a $3.5 million loan from the Agriculture Department's Rural Business-Cooperative Service. In 2005, it received a $293,000 loan from the Small Business Administration. Paraclete gave $2,000 to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth in 2004. A larger, public company, MSA (Mine Safety Appliances Co.), bought Paraclete for $30 million in 2006. (When D'Annunzio says he would have to lay off workers under Obama's tax plan, it's not clear what company he's talking about. We were unable to contact him.) D'Annunzio's other ads are on his Web site. In one, he criticizes Obama's "ultra-liberal stand on abortion" and says, "As a Christian, I cannot vote for Barack Obama." Another focuses on former Weatherman radical Bill Ayers; D'Annunzio says, "I cannot vote for Barack Obama because of his association with terrorists." Yet another skewers Obama for his former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright, and shows Obama without his hand over his heart during the national anthem. "We can't afford a president that uses racially charged comments to divide us," D'Annunzio says. North Carolina has somehow become a home base for Obama-bashing independent operators. If you have any insights into why this is, we'd love to hear them. Besides D'Annunzio, the state is home to the Committee for Truth in Politics and RightChange.com, two of the biggest-spending conservative groups on the air. We'll see soon enough how much money D'Annunzio is willing to commit. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Bringing common sense to the Dakotas

Will Evans — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 16:50:18 -0700

Give 'em props for originality. Common Sense Issues recently launched a radio ad attacking South Dakota Sen. Tim Johnson, a Democrat likely to win a race that's been basically ignored by other outside groups and the Beltway crowd. Common Sense Issues also popped up in August in a nearby but even more unlikely place: North Dakota. That radio ad ridiculed Sen. Kent Conrad (D-ND), even though he isn't up for re-election till 2012. At least Johnson has a race, of sorts -- NPR political editor Ken Rudin rates it "Strong Democratic." Perhaps Common Sense Issues landed in South Dakota because its executive director, Patrick Davis, used to be executive director of the state Republican Party. The new radio ad assails Johnson -- in a humorous way -- for voting against tighter regulation of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae while collecting campaign contributions from the mortgage companies. It suggests that listeners "tell Tim Johnson to stop taking money from Washington lobbyists." Common Sense Issues is best known for its "Trust Huckabee" campaign during the Republican presidential primaries. The group received $50,000 in February from Don Carter, who was the founding owner of the Dallas Mavericks. A predecessor organization, Common Sense Ohio, created quite a ruckus in 2006. That operation -- which shares some leadership with Common Sense Issues -- ran radio ads and controversial robocalls supporting GOP candidates in that year's hot Senate races. It was bankrolled by Ohio investor and steadfast Republican donor Carl Lindner and Massachusetts anti-abortion, pro-abstinence advocate Raymond Ruddy. This year, Lindner gave $400,000 to Newt Gingrich's American Solutions for Winning the Future, while Ruddy is the main financier for Born Alive Truth, which is running anti-Obama ads. And Common Sense is relegated to the Dakotas. Times have changed. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

The scoreboard

Will Evans — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 21:00:00 -0700

Barack Obama clearly has the financial advantage over John McCain when it comes to hard campaign funds. But in the less transparent world of independent groups, conservative organizations have been spending about 75 percent more money on TV time for anti-Obama attack ads than liberal groups have spent to defeat McCain. According to our analysis of the latest numbers from the Campaign Media Analysis Group, conservative groups like Vets for Freedom and American Issues Project have spent about $9,427,000 on TV airtime, while liberal groups like labor unions and MoveOn.org spent $5,351,000 since the beginning of July. That's chump change compared to the candidates' ad buys, but sometimes an outside attack can do what the candidate can't, or won't. For instance, we count four different groups that have run ads linking Obama to former radical Bill Ayers, even when the McCain campaign itself wasn't making that argument. To be sure, this isn't the full picture. Advocacy groups are spending many millions more on radio ads, direct mail, phone calls and canvassing -- and none of that shows up in these numbers. Plus, a group like Brave New PAC spent very little on TV time, but generated a lot of attention for its online anti-McCain videos. One other caveat: CMAG numbers are just estimates, and the ad-tracking service doesn't pick up the National Rifle Association's ads, and others, on local cable stations. To make the calculation, we excluded ad buys that clearly meant to advance a partisan agenda but didn't refer to a presidential candidate, like those from the liberal Health Care for America Now and the conservative Employee Freedom Action Committee. We even took out an American Issues Project ad attacking Senate Democrats because it didn't mention Obama. If you add those in, conservatives have outspent liberals nearly two to one since July. Why July? That's the first month after the primaries ended. Here's the breakdown. Liberal Groups Service Employees International Union = $1,999,602 United Auto Workers = $1,104,206 MoveOn.org = $1,008,080 Planned Parenthood = $330,066 VoteVets = $196,320 Defenders of Wildlife = $156,575 Bring Ohio Back = $127,436 AFL-CIO = $123,274 AFSCME = $82,263 PowerPac = $79,880 United Food & Commercial Workers = $70,841 California Nurses Association = $60,316 Matthew 25 Network = $8,858 Brave New PAC = $3,293 TOTAL = $5,351,010 Conservative Groups Vets for Freedom = $3,906,472 American Issues Project = $1,867,872 RightChange.com = $1,475,581 Committee for Truth in Politics = $1,056,309 Let Freedom Ring = $652,424 Judicial Confirmation Network = $194,283 Born Alive Truth = $165,948 Citizens United = $54,439 Our Country Deserves Better = $28,711 National Republican Trust = $25,162 TOTAL = $9,427,201 There's less than two weeks to go. The liberals could pull ahead -- or the conservatives could pull away. All coming to a TV screen near you. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Choose your weapon

Will Evans — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 20:00:00 -0700

It's the hunters and the hunted. MoveOn.org uses a wall-mounted moose head in a new TV ad against the McCain-Palin ticket; Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund blames dead polar bears on Sarah Palin; and the National Rifle Association says Obama won't let you defend yourself against criminals. MoveOn's animated talking moose head tells us, "You really gotta question John McCain's judgment pickin' Sarah Palin as his VP." After making some cracks about Palin's national security experience -- or, as the moose would say, her lack thereof -- the hunter's trophy says, "She may be a little 'trigger-happy' -- I should know." The ad will will run in cities Palin visits over the next two weeks. Defenders of Wildlife takes the whole animal-killing thing a bit more seriously, after the jump... The ad faults Palin for blocking efforts to protect the endangered polar bear, showing one bear's bloody carcass and another made into a rug. With a nod to Dick Cheney's hunting habits, the ad concludes, "Do we really want another vice president with these values?" The initial ad buy targets women in Northern Virginia. In the National Rifle Association's new ad (below), the hunted are people, and weapons are protection. Recreating a violent home invasion, the ad says, "Imagine your child screaming in the middle of the night when a convicted felon breaks into your home...You use a firearm to defend yourself and your family. Unbelievably, Barack Obama voted to make you the criminal." Commercials have gotten pretty heavy these days. Except for that talking moose.

The riskier of two risks

Will Evans — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:57:58 -0700

It's starting to feel like the presidential election has come down to this: Which candidate is riskier? The McCain campaign calls Barack Obama "too risky for America," and that phrase is being echoed by independent groups like the National Republican Trust. But the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees calls John McCain "risky on Social Security." And here comes the AFL-CIO with this pronouncement: "John McCain's Plan Puts Retirees at Risk." That's from a mailer sent to 500,000 retirees in Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin, Colorado, Indiana, Minnesota, North Carolina and Florida. It labels McCain as a "disaster" for retirees; not too long ago, another AFL-CIO mailer dubbed him a "disaster" for the middle class. Click on the image to view the latest mailing: The labor federation's ranks are also continuing phone calls and personal visits to undecided voters. They're clearly not taking any risks. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Jewish Republicans like Hillary?

Will Evans — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 09:51:50 -0700

If Hillary Clinton had won the Democratic primary, the Republican Jewish Coalition might be quoting Barack Obama. But, as fate would have it, Obama won -- so the RJC says "Hillary is right." The Republican group has launched a TV ad calling Obama's foreign policy "naive" because he said "I would" when asked if he would be willing to meet with the leaders of Iran, Syria, Venezuela, Cuba and North Korea. The ad quotes Clinton -- this was back when she and Obama were in the thick of a brutal primary brawl -- saying of Obama, "That was irresponsible and frankly naive." (The question came up at a CNN debate, and stipulated that talks were part of an evolving peace initiative.) Clinton has moved on, of course. She's campaigning for Obama in Florida -- one of the states where the ad is airing. The million-dollar-plus buy will put the ad in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Nevada as well. The TV ad is a first for the Republican Jewish Coalition in this cycle. It's already produced a series of print advertisements attacking Obama in Jewish newspapers, often with the slogan, "Concerned about Barack Obama? You should be." It's a fierce fight for the presidency among Jewish advocacy organizations. The National Jewish Democratic Council has run its own pro-Obama and anti-McCain ads in newspapers. And when the Jewish Council for Education and Research enlisted comedian Sarah Silverman in calling for a "Great Schlep" to help Obama, the Republican Jewish Coalition fired back with a retort by comedian Jackie Mason, who calls Silverman a "yenta," or meddlesome blabbermouth. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Clinton activist still trying to bring down Obama

Will Evans — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 01:32:02 -0700

Some grudges never die. Even as Hillary Clinton stumps for former rival Barack Obama, some Clinton supporters are still toiling to bring him down. Clinton activist Heidi Li Feldman and her political action committee, The Denver Group, have turned a small amount of contributions into a few amateurish TV ads that have run in such battleground states as Ohio and Pennsylvania. Feldman, a law professor at Georgetown University, says she served as a volunteer legal consultant to Clinton's presidential campaign. The ads, run under the banner "Democrats for Principle before Party," include this one which brings up Obama's former pastor, the controversial Rev. Jeremiah Wright. "A candidate who says he has the judgement to be president from Day One waited until Day 2,411 to cut his ties with someone who said America got what it deserved on 9/11." Then, in a line sure to push the buttons of Democrats old enough to remember, the ad brings up side-by-side pictures of Obama and the late President Richard Nixon, and poses the question liberals used to raise about Nixon: "Would you buy a used car from this man?" The Denver Group doesn't have much money, so the ads won't air widely. The group has raised about $68,374 since forming in June and its big goal now is $15,000 by Election Day, an incredibly small amount by general election standards. Another ad in the Obama-Nixon series says Obama won the Democratic nomination "as a result of a rigged roll-call vote." Never mind that it was Hillary Clinton herself who called off the roll-call vote to nominate Obama by acclamation at the convention. A third ad (below) faults Obama for the costly decision to hold his nomination speech in a football stadium instead of the convention hall in Denver. The chronology is a little problematic: the ad implies that Obama made that decision while Lehman Brothers was collapsing, when actually the investment bank didn't fall until weeks after the speech. With a nifty pun, the ad accuses Obama of turning the economy into "a political football." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Unions out to scare seniors; NRA to scare gun owners

Will Evans — Sat, 18 Oct 2008 00:00:00 -0700

Unions are working overtime to put Barack Obama over the top in battleground states. The American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees is airing a TV ad accusing John McCain of being "Risky on Social Security." The ad says McCain wants to privatize Social Security, subjecting it to stock-market volatility. One senior says, "We earned that money, now he wants to give it to Wall Street. No way." Obama's been using this same argument, and Factcheck.org calls it a whopper. According to Factcheck, the plan McCain supports wouldn't affect current retirees, since no one born before 1950 would be allowed to put Social Security taxes in private accounts. AFSCME, however, contends that the plan would hurt the entire Social Security system and so would affect all seniors. This is AFSCME's first return to TV since the Democratic primaries, when it supported Hillary Clinton against Obama. The ad will run in Wisconsin until close to Election Day, with more than $1 million worth of air time, according to the union. On another front in the issues war, the AFL-CIO, which includes AFSCME, this week dropped a mailer featuring a union member who says Obama will "protect my gun rights." The mailer went to 80,000 gun-loyal swing voters in Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin. Click on the image to read the mailer: The union mailer is evidently trying to counteract the National Rifle Assocation's message that Obama wants to take away gun rights. One of the ads says Obama "wants you to believe that he supports your Second Amendment rights, though he's consistently opposed them." It expands the attack on the Democrat by accusing him of "attacking the First Amendment too," because his campaign lawyers sent letters to stations warning them not to air the NRA's ads. The takeaway? "Don't let Barack Obama trample your constitutional rights." Another NRA ad (below) dredges up Obama's controversial comments from last winter, that some working-class voters "cling to guns or religion" because they are "bitter." The ad says, "Gun owners have their own word for Barack Obama." The word: "Radical." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

PAC puts Obama and 9/11 together

Will Evans — Fri, 17 Oct 2008 00:00:00 -0700

Tying Obama's policies to the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, a new political action committee is airing a TV ad in Ohio that calls the Democrat "too radical" and "too risky." (Update 10/18: National Republican Trust PAC just sent out another fundraising email with the subject line "Obama Lies Smashed by Neutron Bomb in Ohio." The "neutron bomb" refers to the PAC's TV ad.) The language of the National Republican Trust's ad echoes attacks used by the McCain campaign. The ad focuses on Obama's support for allowing illegal immigrants to get drivers licenses, an issue that came up in the Democratic primaries. "The 9/11 plot depended on easy-to-get licenses. Obama's plan gives a license to any illegal who wants one," says the voiceover, behind images of 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta's drivers license, the smoking twin towers, and then Obama's face where Atta's used to be. The PAC's treasurer, Peter Leitner, says the ad is running in Ohio. The PAC was formed last month by a former Defense Department strategist, a freelance journalist and a lawyer who have tried to prove a link between Saddam Hussein and the Sept. 11 attacks. The National Republican Trust's executive director is Scott Wheeler, who has written for the conservative Cybercast News Service and Insight magazine, published by Rev. Sun Myung Moon's Unification Church. His articles include "Iraq-al-Qaida link revealed," "'Dirty-bomb' plot underway in U.S.?" and "Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties." In his 2003 "Iraq-al-Qaida" piece, Wheeler wrote, "Senior investigators and analysts in the U.S. government have concluded that Iraq acted as a state sponsor of terrorism against Americans and logistically supported the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States." President Bush and numerous government reports now say there was no link between Iraq and the 2001 strikes. One of Wheeler's sources for the story was Leitner, who recently retired as a senior strategic trade advisor to the Secretary of Defense. Leitner and the PAC's assistant treasurer, attorney Joshua Ambush, spearheaded efforts to sue Iraq and Saddam Hussein on behalf of the family of top FBI official John O'Neill, who was killed on Sept. 11. Leitner was also a government whistleblower during the Clinton Administration, charging that senior officials ignored warnings about the transfer of technology with military uses to China. Wheeler made a documentary, featuring Leitner, called "Trading With the Enemy: How the Clinton Administration Armed China." Now, Leitner tells us, his security concerns center on Obama. Echoing a persistent rumor on the fringes of anti-Obama sentiment, Leitner says it's not clear that Obama is "even eligible to run for the presidency" because "no one's ever seen his birth certificate." Nonpartisan fact-checkers at Factcheck.org and Politifact.com dispute that theory. "Who is he?" says Leitner. "Almost everything about his background has been locked up in secrecy." Leitner's group has spent about $140,000 blasting out fundraising emails through the conservative news site Newsmax.com, with one email saying that the PAC "is moving to implement a 'shock and awe' strategy against Obama in key states." The email continued, "We plan to take out powerful television ads, Internet ads and other communications to inform Americans about the dangers posed by Barack Obama." Election filings show the PAC also paid $3,000 to the Web site of Clinton-adviser-turned-conservative-pundit Dick Morris for "Email Communication," three days before Morris endorsed the group in a Newsmax email blast. Newsmax, incidentally, featured the group on its front page on Friday. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

ACORN Has Long Been In Republicans' Cross Hairs

Carrie Ching — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:56:50 -0700

The community organization ACORN is under fire for alleged voter registration fraud, and has been a longtime target for conservatives. Republicans are tying Barack Obama to ACORN, but John McCain also spoke to an ACORN rally in 2006. NPR and CIR look at the organization’s background and the controversy. >> Listen to the story on NPR.org.

ACORN's money tree has many branches

Will Evans — Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:36:12 -0700

Conservatives are on the march against the community organization ACORN, accusing its massive voter registration effort of fraud and faulting Obama for having any connections to the group. As we reported this morning, ACORN doesn't necessarily mind the attention. But what exactly is ACORN? Actually, it's many, many things. The Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now has dozens of affiliated entities, from a home-buying assistance corporation to community radio stations to liberal research and training institutes. The giant web of ACORN organizations, primarily based in Louisiana, has been funded by a mix of labor union money, government grants (which really drive conservatives crazy) and charitable contributions from large foundations. See below for a breakdown of funding sources. Plus, Project Vote -- the voter mobilization organization that works closely with and draws its leadership from ACORN -- paid ACORN and an affiliate $5.4 million in 2006. But where does Project Vote get its money? Normally it's hard to tell, but we obtained a 2006 tax return showing the nonprofit's funders, including: $4.5 million from the charitable trust of the investment management firm Vanguard; $425,000 from the Bauman Family Foundation, which also gives to the People for the American Way; and $396,000 from the liberal phone company Working Assets. Union Money ACORN's biggest union backer, the Service Employees International Union, gave more than $4 million to the community organization and its affiliates from 2006-07, according to Dept. of Labor filings. One SEIU local union, the Illinois Homecare Workers and Home Childcare Providers, sprouted from ACORN's organizing efforts and pays rent to ACORN. ACORN's affiliates also pick up money from the Change to Win labor federation, the Food and Commercial Workers Union and the United Federation of Teachers, among others. Government Grants Much to the dismay of conservatives, the Department of Housing and Urban Development gave ACORN Housing Corp. $8.2 million from 2003 to 2006, according to USAspending.gov. ACORN Housing provides counseling, classes, and access to special loans to low-income homebuyers. HUD has given another $1.6 million to other ACORN affiliates since 2003. The Environmental Protection Agency also chipped in, with $100,000 for ACORN's Louisiana Environmental Justice Project in 2004, for a program to rid homes of lead. The Republican National Committee wants a federal probe of ACORN. But the Justice Department has liked ACORN enough to give a New York ACORN affiliate $138,000 in 2005, for a juvenile delinquency prevention program. Foundations The foundations that give to ACORN & Co. vary widely. There are some classically liberal ones: The Bauman Family Foundation gave $350,000 to ACORN's American Institute for Social Justice. George Soros' Open Society Institute gave $300,000 to that institute and $250,000 to ACORN proper. The Charles Stewart Mott Foundation gave the institute $1.8 million. But some of the biggest donors are mainstream foundations of big corporations, according to data from the Foundation Center. The JPMorgan Chase Foundation gave $2.4 million to ACORN Housing and the Bank of America Charitable Foundation gave $1.4 million. Citigroup's foundation gave $1.5 million to the social justice institute. Other major donors include the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, which gave $1.4 million for an education reform campaign. The Ford Foundation has given $1.3 million, including $257,000 this year for "public education and technical assistance to grassroots groups working to expand access to the Earned Income Tax Credit, living wage ordinances and paid sick days." Foundations affiliated with the late founder of the United Parcel Service gave a combined $6.4 million. Individuals The 527 organization Fund for America was set up last year by top liberal donors and operatives to help fund pro-Democratic organizations this election season, but it ended up folding. The Fund, itself bankrolled by George Soros and others, gave $200,000 to ACORN. ACORN has also had its own affiliated 527s. Communities Voting Together, for example, was founded to "educate and mobilize low income voters in key communities in key battleground states in the run-up to the 2004 presidential elections, focusing on Latino and African-American neighborhoods." The group received $125,000 from film producer Jeanne Levy-Hinte; $100,000 from environmentalist donor John R. Hunting, whose wealth comes from the Steelcase office furniture company; $80,000 from the president of Working Assets, and $70,000 from Linda Pritzker of the Hyatt fortune. There's a lot more to ACORN's financial picture that we can't complete here. ACORN's network is complex, and money often transfers from one affiliate to another, making it hard for outsiders to keep track of it all. But one thing is for sure: ACORN is busy.

PACs to the rescue In Michigan

Will Evans — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 18:23:33 -0700

John McCain pulled his staff out of Michigan, but his backers aren't ready to give up. Two conservative political action committees are gearing up to sprinkle the state with anti-Obama and pro-McCain-Palin ads. "We've stepped in to fill the void of the McCain campaign's forced retreat in Michigan, and we're going to put the state's 17 Electoral Votes back in play with our plan to spend over $500,000 in the Great Lake State," reads a recent fundraising plea by Our Country Deserves Better PAC, which was formed this year to defeat Obama. Meanwhile, the Republican Majority Campaign recently sent out emails to supporters saying, "MICHIGAN NEEDS YOUR HELP! It is up to the rest of us to keep Mr. Obama from a free win in Michigan!" Our Country Deserves Better promises to run a slew of different ads in Michigan. One recycles a favorite Republican theme: Obama's connections to notorious people. The ad stars former Weatherman radical Bill Ayers, Rev. Jeremiah Wright and former Detroit Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick, who is headed to jail. "Sorry, Sen. Obama," the ad says. "But if this is the kind of change you want for America, then you can keep the change." Another ad features the PAC's chairman, former California state assemblyman Howard Kaloogian, telling voters, "Obama says our children must learn Spanish, so they can communicate with illegal aliens." Other ads that will run in Michigan include one that ties Obama to what it calls the "failed administration" of Gov. Jennifer Granholm (D) and one that says Obama will raise taxes. And finally, the group produced a soaring tribute to Republican VP candidate Sarah Palin, heralding her as a "fighter for America" who's not "intimidated by the liberal media." Our Country Deserves Better is also running ads in Nevada and Colorado this week, but Michigan will be the top priority, said PAC coordinator Joe Wierzbicki. Wierzbicki works for the Sacramento-based Republican consulting firm of Sal Russo, who serves as the PAC's chief strategist. (And if you're keeping score of who's who in ad-land, and you think Wierzbicki's name is familiar, that's because he coordinated the Sept. 11 screening of the Clarion Fund's documentary on Islamic militants.) The Republican Majority Campaign says its anti-Obama ads will be up in Michigan in the coming days. The group has already spent about $1.4 million against Obama, including mail and phone campaigns. Republican Majority's executive director is Gary Kreep, who also serves as general counsel to the Minuteman Civil Defense Corps. The group's Web site features a video on Obama's ties to the former militant Ayers. (That's also the subject of an ad by yet another Republican PAC, Freedom's Defense Fund, which also focuses on Michigan.) But Republican Majority Campaign treasurer Randy Goodwin tells us the ad that will ultimately run in Michigan is "a strictly positive ad for John McCain." That, compared to what we're seeing these days, would be quite a novel tactic.

Money to burn

Will Evans — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:38:51 -0700

Most people are fretting about their money these days. But there's a select few who, in the heat of the election season, are eager to give their cash away. We're going to name some names in the liberal donor network... VoteVets is a 501(c)(4) noprofit, so usually we don't know who funds it. But the group had to reveal that its latest ad against Sen. Elizabeth Dole (R-NC) was bankrolled mainly by two $100,000 contributions from Northern Californians. One of them, Michael Kieschnick, is president and co-founder of the liberal phone company Working Assets. He also sits on the board of the League of Conservation Voters Education Fund. The other, David DesJardins, worked as a software engineer at Google. He made out pretty well. Here's what the San Francisco Chronicle wrote in 2007:

These days, desJardins, wears many hats, none full time. He invests in startups, evangelizes other Googlers on the merits of philanthropy, consults for a Defense Department-sponsored think tank that specializes in encrypted communication, and is the world's top-ranked player of Titan, a board game featuring armies of mythological beasts. All the while, he's remodeling his home in Burlingame and working with an architect to build a second one. Initially, desJardins' time off was consumed with the complexities of managing his financial bounty, including tax planning and setting up a plan for charitable giving (he and his wife created a $20 million fund within the Silicon Valley Community Foundation).

VoteVets also got $15,000 from an actual resident of North Carolina, liberal blogger James Protzner. Meanwhile, Campaign Money Watch, which is running ads against Colorado Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer and Sen. Ted Stevens (R-AK), just reported a cash infusion including... ...A $300,000 bundle from Matt Entenza, a lawyer and former Democratic House minority leader in the Minnesota legislature. Entenza ran for state attorney general in 2006, but dropped out of the race after revelations that he had hired a private investigator to scrutinize his opponent. Entenza went on to found a liberal think tank called Minnesota 2020. Campaign Money Watch also picked up $185,000 from the Colorado heiress of a medical supply company, Pat Stryker. She also gave $150,000 to the liberal voter-mobilization group America Votes and $300,000 to Progressive Majority this year. She's president of the Bohemian Foundation. Another $100,000 came from Chris Findlater, who gives to Majority Action. And oddly, Campaign Money Watch received $122,000 from another liberal 527 group. The union-funded, yoga-teacher-directed Colorado First Project hasn't done much since its anti-Schaffer ad in August. That's something even more rare -- a political group with money to spare.

Using humor against McCain

Will Evans — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:44:29 -0700

Politics is more popular than ever on comedy shows these days. So why not bring comedy to politics? A new ad series by an Ohio 527 organization tries using the funny bone to clobber McCain on the economy, health care and Social Security. The first ad, which debuted in Ohio during Saturday Night Live, mocks McCain's comments that "the fundamentals of our economy are strong." A guy in a bar jokes, "So what Sen. McCain is saying is that, 'The recession is not real.'...Gues what? This beer gut—not real!" (The beer gut is real.) Then there's the obligatory unibrow joke, because every attack ad needs one. McCain, by the way, has said he was referring to American workers as the strong fundamentals. (Watch the ad here.) The ad comes from Bring Ohio Back, a group last seen during the 2004 election blasting President Bush with TV ads and hosting get-out-the-vote celebrity bus tours staring Hilary Swank, Steve Buscemi, Robert Redford and Paul Newman. The new ad series is suppossed to represent "a sitcom in 30 seconds," said co-founder Jeff Rusnak, a consultant who worked on Democratic Sen. Sherrod Brown's 2006 campaign. "The airwaves are so crowded...we wanted something to penetrate and get people's attention." The series features two guys (Dave and Joe) drinking at a bar and riffing on McCain. They end with one of the guys asking the camera, "What's wrong with John McCain?" Watch them on the group's Web site, and laugh, or not? Now for the group's leadership and funding ... Bring Ohio Back's latest effort started with some public opinion research earlier this year, funded by Rachel Pritzker Hunter, who gave $102,000. The Pritzkers are heirs to the Hyatt fortune, and are big players in Democratic politics. Rachel's mother, psychotherapist and invester Linda Pritzker, has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to liberal 527s over the years. Another Pritzker—Penny—is Barack Obama's national finance chair. Penny's brother was national co-chair of Hillary Clinton's presidential campaign. Rusnak and consuntant Gerald Austin founded Bring Ohio Back in 2004. The two have worked together for decades—Austin managed Rev. Jesse Jackson's 1988 presidential campaign and Rusnak was his assistant. Rusnak also worked for presidential candidates Michael Dukakis and Wesley Clark. So, the question for this ad: Funny, or not funny? You tell us. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

McGovern breaks with Democrats

Will Evans — Tue, 07 Oct 2008 13:55:30 -0700

After Democrat Barack Obama does battle with Republican John McCain tonight, a prominent Obama supporter is scheduled to pop up in the post-debate ad breaks, stating his opposition to pro-union legislation that enjoys the backing of Obama and Democratic leaders. George McGovern, the 1972 Democratic nominee and now a venerated party elder, appears in minute-long ads by the Employee Freedom Action Committee, which is using criticism of the Employee Free Choice Act as a club to beat on Democratic Senate candidates in several states. While unions say the bill will make it easier for workers to join a union without corporate harassment, McGovern and industry-backed groups say it will take away secret ballots in union elections, allowing the organizers to intimidate workers. McGovern says in the ad: "It's hard to believe that any politician would agree to a law denying millions of employees the right to a private vote." At least at first glance, it's also hard to believe that arch-liberal McGovern would team up with Rick Berman, who runs the Employee Freedom Action Committee. It has got to be one of the oddest of odd couples. Berman has made a career of attacking liberal activists, Democrat-backed policies and labor unions on behalf of industry. He assisted Newt Gingrich in his climb to become speaker of the House. The Employee Freedom Action Committee is one of several nonprofits set up by Berman to engage in aggressive public relations without indentifying the donors behind them. This year, he's spending $30 million to attack Democratic Senate candidates with ads about the labor bill. His group will spend $2 million airing the McGovern ad in key Senate races in Kentucky, Oregon, Maine, Mississippi, Louisiana, New Hampshire and Colorado. (Another group, the Coalition for a Democratic Workplace, is plowing this same anti-union ground in Senate races.) McGovern, on the other hand, is celebrated at Democratic party gatherings. In a dramatic move this spring, he abandoned Hillary Clinton and endorsed Barack Obama in the name of party unity. Then again, when McGovern says in the ad, "I've always been a champion of labor unions," it may be a bit of a stretch. (He goes on to say, "But I fear that today's union leaders are turning their backs on democratic workplace elections.") He was a congressman and senator from South Dakota, a right-to-work state that prohibits "closed" union shops. McGovern came out against the Employee Free Choice Act in a Wall Street Journal op-ed in August. He also turns up at the Web site of the FirstJobs Institute, a component in Berman's network. And not that we believe in grudges, but the record shows that when McGovern was on track to win the nomination in 1972, organized labor did all that it could to stop him. It's also worth wondering what impact the ad might have tonight—a presidential nominee from 36 years ago talking about a bill that's pretty much guaranteed to go unmentioned by the 2008 contenders. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Another wave of union power

Will Evans — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 17:37:30 -0700

The Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO labor federation are spearheading another massive wave of anti-McCain—er, officially pro-Obama—outreach in battleground states. SEIU says it has sent 75 percent of its staff to key states for a final push on undecided voters before the election. Busloads of volunteers are distributing flyers comparing Obama's health care plan (favorably) to McCain's, with more in the mail. And the union sent DVDs about the health care plans to 225,000 seniors, with follow-up phone calls "making sure they're actually watching the DVD," according to SEIU political director Jon Youngdahl. The DVDs went to Indiana, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Michigan, Wisconsin and Iowa. "Wer'e trying to reach further and go deeper than we ever had before," said SEIU Secretary-Treasurer Anna Burger. SEIU says it's just bought $1 million of air time in Pennsylvania and Wisconsin for an ad featuring two women in a grocery store chatting about health care bills. "And get this," one of them says. "McCain wants to start taxing our benefits." Says the other, "Maybe you should send him your bills." The AFL-CIO, meanwhile, is blasting out a web video via email to hundreds of thousands of voters. The video questions McCain's principles and maverick image. It coins a new slogan for anti-McCain forces: "John McCain: Straight talk—from both sides of his mouth." Working America, the AFL-CIO's affiliate for non-union workers, is sending out 1 million new mailers to battleground states and plans to canvass 100,000 members per week until election day. The mailer calls McCain "An Economic Disaster for the Middle Class," and says he "spent years helping Wall Street fat cats break the rules." Click on the image to see the mailer: Will all this hard-hitting talk on McCain's health care and economic policies cut through the din of personal attacks perpetrated by the candidates' campaigns? SEIU's Burger says, "Voters really want to know about the issues." By the time the unions are done, voters will be inundated with partisan talking points, whether they want it or not. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Jim Bopp's fight to liberate political money

Will Evans — Mon, 06 Oct 2008 10:41:20 -0700

No sooner had we noted that conservative attorney James Bopp seemed to be setting up to sue the Federal Election Commission over an anti-abortion, anti-Obama ad, we got this news: Bopp sued the FEC Friday over an anti-abortion, anti-Obama ad. Only, it's not the National Right to Life Committee ad we were writing about. Turns out the indefatigable Bopp also represents the Committee for Truth in Politics, recently formed by a North Carolina Republican operative. Bopp is suing to protect the group from any FEC enforcement actions that might prevent it from running its ads—even though the FEC hasn't done anything yet and isn't likely to take any action till after the election. Bopp did essentially the same thing earlier this year on behalf of another group, a 527 called The Real Truth About Obama. That group has also targeted Obama's record on abortion, but its ads haven't run yet. Bopp won't say whether it all ads up to a coordinated legal strategy. But the three simultaneous efforts hammer home his view of federal campaign finance laws: that they chill free speech if you have to ask permission from a slow-moving government agency, or get a preliminary injunction against the agency, before you air a political ad—or else face the threat of fines later. "We have clients that want to do real things," he says. "There's all sorts of people out there that want to participate in our democracy ... They don't want to suffer a future investigation and enforcement action when the Constitution protects what they do." Those who want to regulate political money, of course, see it differently. They say Bopp and his clients want to tear down the legal walls that keep big donors, corporations and undisclosed contributions from having undue electoral influence. And the legal walls are hardly rigid. The McCain-Feingold law made them stronger in 2002. But Bopp blew a new hole in them last year, as lawyer for Wisconsin Right To Life—just his latest of many victories. Meanwhile, the Committee for Truth in Politics says in its lawsuit that it's got another hard-hitting ad to let loose. To quote from the ad:

It's tragic, but true. Two-thirds of all prisoners convicted of rape or sexual assault committed their crime against a child. Even worse, the average child predator exploits seven to two hundred victims in their lifetime. In the Illinois Senate, Barack Obama was the only member that voted to allow early release for convicted sexual abusers.

Besides the Committee for Truth in Politics, the other plaintiff in Bopp's most recent suit is Holly Lynn Koerber. According to the suit, she's a North Carolina resident who "reasonably fears that CTP will be silenced and she will be unable to continue receiving CTP's ads and materially-similar ads, all in violation of her First Amendment rights." Koerber has experience in this. She also served as a plaintiff, along with the Republican Governors Association, in suing the North Carolina State Board of Elections in 2004. The plaintiff's filing identified her as vice-chair of the Pasquotank County Republican Party. Bopp may be the nation's most experienced lawyer in challenging campaign finance laws. For 30 years, he's been general counsel to the National Right To Life Committee, which has spearheaded opposition to restrictions on political money. He's also a member of the Republican National Committee and counsel to Focus on the Family and the Indiana Republican Party. Besides the three cases discussed here, Bopp also represents Citizens United in a lawsuit against the FEC. He lost in lower courts but has appealed to the Supreme Court. And he has other suits against state-level campaign finance agencies. "I'm probably involved in 50 cases right now," he says, admitting that sometimes it's difficult to keep track of them all. Expect more from Mr. Bopp. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Evangelical leader goes all in for McCain

Will Evans — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 12:35:29 -0700

And to think that anyone thought James Dobson would sit out this presidential race. The Christian Right leader and his advocacy group, Focus on the Family Action, are planning a multi-state strategy to help elect McCain, and to prevent Democratic gains in Congress while they're at it. The group's September newsletter spells out some nightmare scenarios it says could happen with an Obama adminisration: Supreme Court Justice Hillary Clinton; open homosexuality in the barracks; a Freedom of Choice Act invalidating all abortion limitations. The newsletter then explains the group's action plan for defeating Obama: 1. Harness the media with crafty "marketing ingenuity." 2. Directly target voters "in a big way in up to 16 states with key U.S. Senate and House races." That will include mailers, emails and "carefully targeted radio ads." Click on the image for the full newsletter: For the mailers, Focus on the Family Action has prepared special messages for battleground states. In the Colorado version, for example, Dobson writes:

As a Colorado voter, you are right in the middle of one of the most important and closely watched Senate races in the country. The stakes in this contest could not be higher. If Barack Obama wins the White House -- a very real possibility -- the U.S. Senate will be the last defense against his liberal agenda on abortion and marriage. Sen. Obama has already promised to support the Freedom of Choice Act, which would overturn every pro-life law on abortion in the nation. He has also pledged to abolish the Defense of Marriage Act and to allow open homosexuality in our military. The only hope of stopping this radical onslaught will be a strong showing of commonsense conservatives in the Senate.

Of the Senate candidates, Dobson writes that Republican Bob Schaffer "maintained a consistently pro-life and pro-family record in Congress" while Democrat Mark Udall "established an audaciously liberal record." An accompanying chart contrasts their views on marriage, abortion and taxes. Click on the image below to view the mailer: Similar mailers lambast Democratic Sen. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Democratic Senate candidates Al Franken of Minnesota and Kay Hagan of North Carolina. Still other mailers target House races in Texas, Pennsylvania, Missouri, Michigan and Florida -- all with an emphasis on Obama. View them here. It's unclear, however, how many of these mailers will go out. The September member newsletter contains this postscript:

You should be aware that contributions have been well below budget all summer, which has put us in a position where we may have to scale back some of the plans I've mentioned. Your gift now, however, can still help ensure that we are able to go full force with the full plan -- right up to November 4.

Dobson's money plea, plus that suggestion of a black-robed Hillary Clinton on the high bench, constitute an admirable piece of the direct-mail writer's craft. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Election 2008: The Secret Money Project

Carrie Ching — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 10:48:25 -0700

The Center for Investigative Reporting and National Public Radio have launched a joint initiative tracking the hidden cash in this election season. The Secret Money Project catalogues and examines the sometimes-shadowy independent groups seeking to influence both the presidential and Senate races. In 2004, the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth ads kneecapped Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry’s campaign. This year’s crop of independent ads has the potential to be equally powerful. Outside advocacy groups can raise unlimited sums of money and operate under more secrecy than the candidates or party committees. + INTERACTIVE MAP: Who's paying to influence voters in your state? Watch the ads and see who's paying for them in a state-by-state interactive map. + BLOG: Breaking news and analysis by reporters Peter Overby (NPR) and Will Evans (CIR). + DIG DEEPER: See profiles of key advocacy groups, showing their background, context and funding sources. A leadership directory details the interconnected web of political operatives behind the advocacy groups. + SEND US TIPS: Readers can report new ads, automated calls, and other political efforts by independent groups.

Who's behind the "Radical Islam" DVD?

Will Evans — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:38:33 -0700

CIR's Will Evans tracks a controversial DVD about radical Islam for the Secret Money Project. Here's the trailer of the DVD, which appeared as an insert in newspapers across the country: The blogosphere is alive with the sound of buzz—all about an inflammatory DVD on radical Islam being distributed to millions of households at the peak of election season. Critics are calling the DVD, "Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West," anti-Muslim hate, or politicking, or both. It doesn't mention or even obliquely allude to the presidential candidates. It couldn't, since it was made in 2006. But as whisper campaigns dog Obama with rumors that he's a secret Muslim, the DVD showed up as an insert in some 70 newspapers, with an emphasis in swing states. The obvious question: Who is behind it? And the answer: The DVD is distributed by the Clarion Fund, a nonprofit set up by the film's producer, Rabbi Raphael Shore. But not much is known about the group. It's a 501(c)(3) charity, which means it can't engage in partisan politics. It did apparently have material on its Web site supporting John McCain, but then took it down. Clarion has connections to Aish HaTorah, a strongly pro-Israel Jewish educational organization promoting Jewish identity and pride. Aish HaTorah has offices in Israel and the U.S. Clarion's corporate filings in Delaware list the same address as Aish HaTorah New York. Clarion's two directors in 2006 were Shore and Jacob Fetman, who served as Aish's CFO. In 2007, the organization listed its directors as Shore, Henry Harris and Rebecca Kabat. Rabbi Harris is educational director at Aish HaTorah NY and Kabat has also worked for Aish. Shore himself has worked for Aish HaTora. He told the Washington Times in 1992 that he "went to Israel 10 years ago to try to 'rescue' his twin brother, Ephraim, from Aish HaTorah," because he though it was a "big hoax." Instead, Shore became convinced and joined the organization's management. (Their other brother, David, created Fox's TV show "House.") Aish's Ephraim Shore has also been president of the organization HonestReporting.com, which, according to Aish's Web site, helped to produce and promote Raphael Shore's film. But don't ask where the Clarion Fund gets its funding. It's not telling. And with its 501(c)(3) status, it doesn't have to. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

NRA takes aim at Obama, Biden

Will Evans — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 10:20:06 -0700

The National Rifle Association has launched an aggressive multi-media campaign against Obama, saying he "would be the most anti-gun president in American history." The campaign, tuned to reach voters in swing states, includes an arsenal of TV, radio and print ads, all available on this website featuring a not-so-flattering photo of Obama. One TV ad slips in a subtle not-one-of-us message, as a Virginia hunter says, "Now I learn that Barack Obama supports a huge new tax on my guns and ammo … Where is this guy from? He's probably never been hunting a day in his life." Another features a veteran of the war in Iraq saying, "I served my country on the battlefield to protect our freedoms. There's no way I'm voting for a president who will take them away." By the way, Factcheck.org says the NRA distorts Obama's positions. Yet another ad has a Michigan hunter taking aim at Obama's controversial comments that some working-class voters "cling to guns or religion" because they are "bitter." Says the hunter, "Because I believe in traditional American values, go to church, exercise my right to own a firearm, Barack Obama says I'm bitter. Well I'm not bitter, I'm blessed." The message ties in with T-shirts and yard signs emblazoned: "I'm a 'bitter' gun owner and I vote." Each ad ends with the slogan, "Defend Freedom, Defeat Obama." Obama's running mate earns his own ad from the NRA, which says, "Joe Biden wants you to believe he shares your values because he was born in Scranton. But Pennsylvania gun owners and hunters don't share his values." The NRA is also sending out an anti-Obama fact sheet to its 4 million members. Nothing camouflaged about where the NRA stands in this election. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Palin's record on earmarks

Will Evans — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 10:44:08 -0700

My esteemed co-blogger (Peter Overby) has had a couple of broadcast pieces, on Tuesday's ATC and today's Morning Edition, examining Republican vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin's complicated record on earmarks. We have some extra goodies on Palin's record here. Gov. Palin and running mate John McCain have trumpeted her opposition to earmarks like the infamous Alaskan "bridge to nowhere," which became a rallying call against congressional pork projects. But when she was running for governor in 2006, Palin told voters she supported projects like the bridge. Here's a clip of Palin at an Alaska Conservation Voters candidate forum saying, "I do support the infrastructure projects that are on tap here in the state of Alaska that our congressional delegations worked hard for."
At another candidate forum, Palin had kind words for Rep. Don Young (R-AK) and his renowned ability to bring home the federal bacon. "And our congressional delegation, God bless 'em. They do a great job for us," she said at the forum hosted by the Alaska Professional Design Council. "Representative Don Young, especially God bless him, with transportation -- Alaska did so well under the very basic provisions of the transportation act that he wrote just a couple of years ago. We had a nice bump there. We're very, very fortunate to receive the largesse that Don Young was able to put together for Alaska."
Now, it was Young who plopped the "bridge to nowhere" in federal legislation to begin with. But even that kind of influence doesn't help him these days. Not too many people are trying to cozy up with Young now that he's in trouble -- and clearly Palin has changed her mind about him. What kind of trouble? The 18-term Alaska congressman is under federal investigation in a corruption scandal that has already nailed several state lawmakers and produced an indictment of Alaska's other earmark champion, Sen. Ted Stevens (R). It's not even clear whether Young survived his primary election last week. His main opponent was Sean Parnell, Palin's lieutenant governor. The free-market Club For Growth ran ads attacking his free and easy use of federal tax money for earmarks. He seemed so vulnerable that Democrats actually spent money to help him because they thought he'd be weaker than Parnell in the general election. Palin, no longer feeling so rosy about Young's "largesse" for Alaska, backed Parnell. This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Palin Casts Herself As Reformist, Outsider

Carrie Ching — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 10:10:20 -0700

Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin and running mate John McCain have trumpeted her opposition to earmarks like the infamous “bridge to nowhere,” but Palin’s record is more complicated. As mayor, she hired a lobbyist to get federal money and, when running for governor, said she supported earmarks like the infamous bridge. >> Listen to the story on NPR.org.

Liberal group sends a snide "thank you" to Republicans

Will Evans — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 14:46:22 -0700

A liberal group called Campaign for America's Future has a new ad designed, it seems, mainly to annoy the delegates to the Republican National Convention. The ad starts with the words, "To the conservatives gathered in St. Paul: Thanks for the memories..." It goes on to show images of a submerged New Orleans, a gas pump with its dials spinning, a home-foreclosure sign and President Bush's "Mission Accomplished" banner. Get it? Here's the thing, though. The ad, according to the group, is airing this week "in 365,000 hotel rooms across the country." So, either hotel guests are a key swing voter demographic we haven't heard about yet, or Campaign for America's Future decided the best way to spend its money was to pester Republican delegates trying to catch a break from the speeches in the solace of their hotel rooms. Campaign for America's Future is a 501(c)(4) nonprofit, so it's hard to know who funds it, but the Service Employees International Union gave the group $50,000 in 2007 and the AFL-CIO gave $67,500 from 2006-07.
This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Strange Bedfellows Behind Anti-Obama "Turban" Ad

Will Evans — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 20:33:29 -0700

[video:3829:full] When Barack Obama explained his decision to opt out of public financing for the general election, he said he needed to defend against attacks by stealth conservative groups. He pointed to one ad in particular, which showed an edited clip of him: "We are no longer a Christian nation … We are also a Muslim nation," spliced with a photo of Obama wearing a turban. "It took a speech that I had made, extolling faith, and made it seem as if I had said that America was a Muslim nation," Obama told reporters on June 20. The ad, the first truly inflammatory spot to air on television this year, was produced by a shadowy group called the Coalition Against Anti-Christian Rhetoric. Though it only aired once — just before the South Dakota primary — it created a hubbub by linking Obama to Islam. Yet few clues helped answer the question of who was behind the coalition. It turns out the ad was the product of a hypnotherapist who later appeared in a pro-Clinton demonstration at the Denver convention, an apolitical wedding videographer, and a felon who is now on the run. Their saga highlights the outsize influence that a hodgepodge collection of political amateurs can have in a national election — in this case, by accident. The Hypnotherapist Cristi Adkins says she was a gung-ho Clinton activist when some friends, an informal group of Christians from the South, asked her for help in responding to an Obama speech that offended them. They had come across a 2006 speech in which Obama, addressing issues of faith, said it would be problematic to base public policy on Christianity because parts of the Bible seem to support slavery and "stoning your child if he strays from the faith." Adkins, who was also bothered by the speech, says she helped her friends organize and come up with a name — the Coalition Against Anti-Christian Rhetoric. She set up a Web site for them. And she helped produce the ad, using her husband's firm, Washington-based Allen Media Strategies, to place it on TV in South Dakota in time for the Democratic primary there. The ad used an edited clip of the speech in which Obama actually says, "Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation — at least not just. We are also a Jewish nation, a Muslim nation, and a Buddhist nation and a Hindu nation, and a nation of nonbelievers." Other parts of the speech, where Obama discusses his own Christian faith, have been used in radio ads supporting him. Adkins says the group itself didn't support or oppose a specific candidate — the members just wanted to take Obama to task for comments they felt denigrated Christianity. Adkins, who says she's an independent who voted for Democrat John Kerry in 2004, has much stronger feelings about Obama. "I truly fear an Obama presidency. This guy's so dangerous, who needs al-Qaida?" she told me. Adkins is a hypnotherapist and nurse who has a fat loss program and wellness center in Reston, Va. She has become a John McCain supporter and formed a new group: Clintons4McCain. She's been on Fox News and says she met with Sen. McCain in June along with other Clinton supporters campaigning against Obama. The Convicted Felon Adkins says she met Mike Donovan through her pro-Clinton organizing. As far as she knew, she says, he was another ardent Clinton activist. They even protested together at a rally, she says. Donovan, now 31, told her he could raise money for the ad, according to Adkins. She recalls him saying he was a minister and could handle press. Here's what Adkins says she didn't know: In 2000, Donovan was arrested for felony grand larceny and forgery, convicted and sentenced to eight months in jail, according to Virginia court records. In 2005, he was again arrested for grand larceny; the charge was reduced to a misdemeanor, and he was convicted. He now has an outstanding arrest warrant on felony charges of issuing bad checks and defrauding a Holiday Inn, according to a police spokesperson from Chesterfield County, Va. His photo appears on that county's "Most Wanted" Web site. All of which goes to explain why Adkins would later say, "He is a shenanigan. ... It was my fault [for trusting him], so I will pay for it." The Wedding Videographer The person Adkins has to pay is Nick Thomas, who actually produced the attack ad. Thomas runs Video Artistry, a Charlotte, NC company that shoots weddings and corporate events. He works with his brother, who goes by the stage name Scott Miles and played the brother of Jake Gyllenhaal's character in the 1999 movie October Sky. Adkins' husband had done work promoting Miles' film career. Thomas says he and his brother had never produced a political ad when Adkins came to them. He says Adkins originally wanted to depict Obama with devil horns juxtaposed with images of Hitler. The brothers declined. "I certainly didn't want to completely slander somebody — especially a guy that might be the next president. Then I get audited every year or something," Thomas said when we spoke. Adkins acknowledges she wanted to show the disturbing similarities she saw between audience reactions to Obama and Hitler. As for the horns, the hypnotherapist says, "I might have said, 'Can you put a subliminal shadow in?' I don't know that I said put devil horns." She says she was just brainstorming — "throwing noodles against the wall as to what could be done." In any case, at that point the coalition didn't have any money to produce an ad. And that's where Donovan, the felon, stepped in. Adkins and Thomas say that Donovan crafted the final script for the ad. Adkins' husband, radio personality and media consultant Burke Allen, did the voiceover, according to the videographer. Donovan promised payment ... and then disappeared. (Donovan did not answer calls, e-mails or an attempt to contact him through MySpace.) Which raises this question: If it was never paid for, how did this incendiary ad ever run on television? The answer: Someone goofed. Allen Media Strategies placed the ad to run on June 2, the day before the South Dakota Democratic primary, on a CBS affiliate in Sioux Falls. But when KELO-TV didn't receive any payment, it pulled the ad. And on June 2, Allen Media canceled the buy. So it came as a surprise to everyone when, just after the 10 o'clock news that night, the ad went on the air. A station staffer made a mistake, the station president explained to me later. Adkins says the coalition didn't end up liking the ad — which they thought too extreme. But, she said, "An ad that was never paid for got more media than they could ever hope for." Who is this "they" Adkins refers to? She says she is protecting coalition members' identities for privacy reasons. But Thomas, the videographer, says he doesn't believe there ever was a coalition aside from Adkins. Tracking down Donovan, in order to get paid, became an obsession for Thomas. He recites Donovan's addresses off the top of his head. He thinks he has traced Donovan to a possible relative who set up other anti-Obama Web sites and plays in a heavy metal band. In Donovan's absence, Adkins has agreed to pay Thomas for his work. Then, she says, Clintons 4 McCain will own the ad and might use some form of it to blast Obama again. In the meantime, Adkins showed up outside the Democratic National Convention in Denver on Monday, holding her Clintons 4 McCain banner amid a crowd of chanting Obama fans. Never camera-shy, she launched into a verbal bout with MSNBC's Chris Matthews over Obama's religion, at one point mockingly telling Matthews, "Maybe you can't hear — should we clean your ears out?" Thomas, the videographer, doesn't have Adkins' stomach for political sparring: "I don't care to do any more political-type stuff." Will Evans is a staff reporter at the Center for Investigative Reporting. He writes for the Secret Money Project, a joint effort of CIR and NPR.

New Ads Rip Obama, But Democrats Fight Back

Carrie Ching — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 15:38:50 -0700

It could be the Swift Boat ad of 2008. A conservative group pops out of nowhere with a hard-hitting TV ad against Obama. A billionaire foots the bill. Obama’s campaign reacts fast. CIR and NPR look into the wrangling over the ad. >> Listen to the full story on NPR.org. >> Read the corporate history of the group behind the ad, reported first on CIR’s Secret Money Project blog.

Anti-Obama operatives join forces

Will Evans — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 16:26:00 -0700

Jerome Corsi may be getting all the attention right now for his anti-Obama attack book, but there's another veteran political operative who has been toiling away to take down the Democratic candidate with a Swift-Boat-style campaign. And now, the two are working together. Floyd Brown, whose most famous effort was the "Willie Horton ad" that damaged Democrat Michael Dukakis' presidential campaign in 1988, has been working on a viral campaign to send anti-Obama videos to millions of voters. His main organization, the National Campaign Fund, runs the Web site ExposeObama.com, which features videos linking Obama to gang violence and questioning Obama's assertion that he's never been a Muslim (below). (The Obama campaign's "Fight the Smears" Web site has a special entry for Brown.) Brown, in an interview today, says he has two more upcoming videos based on a collaboration with Corsi, co-author of the book that launched the crippling Swift Boat veterans critique of Democrat John Kerry in 2004. The new ads are based on Corsi's new book, "The Obama Nation." But this election is different from the ones that produced Swift Boat Veterans for Truth and the Willie Horton ad. Brown is running a strictly regulated political action committee funded only by small donors, instead of a 527 organization with unlimited donations like the Swift Boat group. That 527 and others were later fined by the Federal Election Commission for violating election laws, and Brown says that's enough to scare him off. "Would you go to jail for a political message?" he asked rhetorically. And instead of concentrating on televised ads as he did in 1988, Brown is focusing almost all of his resources on a viral email and web campaign to spread his message. "An ad on Monday Night Football where the guy's getting up to grab a beer [during commercials] is not more effective than where someone sits down and clicks an ad to watch all the way through," said Brown, who also notes that Web ads are much cheaper. "We have just had a blitzing program, to blitz conservative websites and conservative email lists," he said. "We've sent millions of emails." Brown says he's focusing on swaying conservatives because, when his group launched its effort earlier this year, some religious conservatives had a positive view of Obama. That—thanks to controversy over Obama's former pastor and, Brown says, the ExposeObama.com campaign—has faded. Certainly, Brown's group has gained some traction. From April through June it raised nearly half a million dollars from small donors, according to FEC filings. But why hasn't his or any other ads had the same impact as the Swift Boat ads or Willie Horton? Brown tried casting one of his Obama ads as "Willie Horton II," (below), but that hasn't panned out. Brown thinks the Horton ad—which blamed Dukakis for temporarily releasing a convicted felon who then raped a woman—gets too much credit, anyway. Dukakis, he says, helped do himself in. President Clinton, on the other hand, was much better at deflecting attacks. And what about Obama? "If television and Hollywood manipulation are what decide this election, then Obama wins hands down," Brown says. "He's got the dough, he's got people like [David] Geffen and the whole Dreamworks crew. He's had a very effectively crafted campaign." But it's not over yet. "The Willie Horton ad didn't air till Labor Day," Brown says. "There's still a lot of time for things to happen." This originally appeared on The Secret Money Project Blog, a joint project of CIR and National Public Radio tracking the hidden cash in the 2008 election.

Who's paying to influence voters?

Carrie Ching — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 13:55:11 -0700

A new project by CIR and NPR follows the money behind independent campaign ads leading up to the 2008 election. The Election 2008: Secret Money Project tracks the funders of ads intended to sway voters—much like the ones launched by Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, the independent organization that attacked Senator John Kerry in 2004. Watch the ads. Read the analysis. See who's paying, and who they're connected to. A recent post on the Secret Money Project by CIR's Will Evans:

Former Swift Boat Donor Finds New Target Mark Udall, meet Bob Perry. Udall, a Democratic member of Congress from Colorado, is running for Senate this year in a race that is attracting out-of-state money from all sides. Perry, a Texas developer, gave $4.4 million to Swift Boat Veterans for Truth to help defeat John Kerry in 2004. FEC reports reveal that the Texan dropped $400,000 this month to air an ad criticizing Udall for "wasteful" spending. Perry gave the money to the Club for Growth. The group said in a press release that the ad will be up for 2 weeks. Watch the ad:

Union Operative Advocates and Gains Power

Peter Overby — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 14:00:33 -0700

The Service Employees International Union, besides representing 2 million workers, is one of the most active and powerful political organizations in the nation. Beyond its own direct efforts, which are vast, the union also helps create, lead, and fund dozens of other organizations and coalitions that are influential in public policy debates and elections. NPR and CIR investigate. >> Listen to the story on NPR.org. >> View a chart of SEIU's financial and political connections.

Independent Groups Step Up On-Air Ads

Peter Overby — Fri, 18 Jul 2008 14:15:10 -0700

Election season is heating up, as independent groups from across the political spectrum launch new ad campaigns targeting candidates for president and Congress. CIR and NPR look at dueling ads featuring veterans and two competing campaigns reaching out to Christians. >> Listen to the story on NPR.

Kings of the Hill

Will Evans — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 11:47:15 -0700

With the federal government poised to rescue teetering mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, critics of the companies are having their "I told you so" moment. As NPR reports today, those critics point to Freddie's and Fannie's political connections and lobbying power as the reason they haven't been more tightly regulated. CIR's Daniella De Franco and I spotlight some of the big names associated with the mortgage companies, from McCain mega-fundraiser Wayne Berman to Democratic operative Harold Ickes. How did Fannie and Freddie build such an arsenal? Well, they hired some important people. And then there were the presidential appointments to their boards. This from a 2003 Washington Post story:

During a chat at the White House in 1994, retiring Sen. Dennis DeConcini (D-Ariz.) recalls President Bill Clinton saying, "You've been a great friend, Dennis, what can I do for you?" "I told him I wanted to be on the board of Freddie Mac or Fannie Mac," DeConcini said in an interview last week. A short time later, Clinton granted the wish, naming the senator to the board of McLean-based Freddie Mac, where DeConcini served for five years and earned tens of thousands of dollars in cash, stock and stock options.

Liberal, Conservative Groups Vie for Vets' Interests

Peter Overby — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 11:57:41 -0700

Two politically opposed veterans' advocacy groups—Vets for Freedom and Vote Vets—are battling for voters. NPR and CIR look beyond the political rhetoric to examine the organizations' financing, and how they might affect this election. >> Listen to the story on National Public Radio.

Nonprofits Look for New Ways to Shape Campaign

Peter Overby — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 09:36:58 -0700

The 2008 presidential campaign began with predictions that outside groups would play influential roles. Now nonprofits are quietly mobilizing, especially on the Left. One network of liberal activist groups, started by Progress Now, is trying to shape the debate with a streamlined operation of small staff, low budgets and the Internet—and is backed by powerful connections from the Left. >> Listen to the story on NPR.org. >> View chart of the money and influence connections behind a liberal network. (Click on image to enlarge.)

A Day in the Life of Independent Political Ads

Peter Overby — Wed, 11 Jun 2008 15:41:28 -0700

Now that the presidential primaries are finished, independent political groups are spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on TV ads to influence the upcoming presidential and congressional elections. NPR takes a look at one day of independent advertising, with reporting by CIR. >> Listen to the story on NPR.

Troubles Loom for '527' Ad Efforts

Will Evans — Wed, 28 May 2008 12:03:32 -0700

Independent political groups are already trying to influence the presidential campaign with TV ads and automated phone calls. Candidates John McCain and Barack Obama say they don’t want any more Swift Boat-like attacks. CIR and NPR investigate. >> Visit the NPR website to hear the complete story.

McCain and his lobbyists

Will Evans — Mon, 19 May 2008 13:00:00 -0700

In order to prove he wants to reform big-money Washington politics, GOP presidential candidate John McCain is distancing himself from campaign fundraisers found to be lobbyists for foreign governments by a CIR/ABCNews.com investigation. McCain’s national co-chairman, Tom Loeffler, for example, recently resigned after controversy over his work on behalf of Saudi Arabia. As CIR first reported, Loeffler personally arranged a meeting between McCain and the then-Saudi Ambassador. McCain also let go of advisor Eric Burgeson who, as CIR reported, was hired by the Kurdistan Regional Government. And Doug Goodyear, who was in charge of the Republican national convention, stepped down after Newsweek reported on his ties to a lobbying firm hired by Myanmar’s military junta. Two other McCain fundraisers—Kirsten Chadwick and Peter Madigan—are registered to lobby for foreign governments. Another, Judy Black, has terminated her work for a company owned by the government of Dubai. The McCain campaign set a new policy last week, stating that:

1.) No person working for the Campaign may be a registered lobbyist or foreign agent, or receive compensation for any such activity. 2.) Part-time volunteers for the Campaign must disclose to the Campaign any status as registered lobbyists or foreign agents. Such persons are prohibited from involvement in any Campaign policy-making on the subjects on which they are registered, including service on policy task forces or participation in policy discussions on those subjects. Such persons are also prohibited from lobbying Senator McCain or his Senate personal office or committee staffs during the period they are volunteering for the campaign.

And also:

5.) Senator McCain has also announced that it will be his policy that anyone serving in a McCain Administration must commit not to lobby the Administration during his presidency.

To view CIR’s chart showing presidential fundraisers who work for foreign governments, click here.

Presidential gunslingers

Carrie Ching — Fri, 09 May 2008 18:00:00 -0700

GOOD magazine does a great job summing up the campaign fundraising race for the 2008 presidential election in this entertaining little video: "America: Love it or Fix it."

Misleading Calls Confuse Voters

Carrie Ching — Thu, 01 May 2008 17:22:44 -0700

A nonprofit organization with ties to Sen. Hillary Clinton is under fire for running apparently illegal "robocalls" in advance of next week's Democratic primary in North Carolina. The group promotes voting by single women, but its recent calls contained misleading information that may discourage voting in the African-American community, a bastion of support for Sen. Barack Obama. CIR and NPR look into the organization’s political connections and financing, including a contract that charity watchdogs find troubling. >> Listen to the story and view the chart on the NPR website.

More details on anti-McCain group

Will Evans — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:21:46 -0700

A political organization financed by film producer Steve Bing has given hundreds of thousands of dollars to a liberal group running attack ads against Republican presidential candidate John McCain. American Family Voices Voters’ Alliance gave $300,000 to the Campaign to Defend America last November, according to government filings. The Campaign to Defend America aired ads last month calling McCain the “McSame” as President Bush. As previously reported by CIR and NPR, the Campaign to Defend America ads were financed with $1 million from the Fund for America, a group led and funded by top Democrat donors and operatives. American Family Voices, which ran controversial automated telephone calls to voters in 2006, is headed by Mike Lux, a former aide to President Bill Clinton. Before contributing to the Campaign to Defend America, American Family Voices received $600,000 from liberal mega-donor Bing. Bing gave millions to pro-Democrat groups in the 2004 election cycle, and is currently a bundler for Sen. Hillary Clinton, raising at least $100,000 for her presidential campaign. Bing is also known for his playboy reputation, including a paternity dispute with actress Elizabeth Hurley.

The Money Behind the Anti-McCain Ad

Carrie Ching — Wed, 05 Mar 2008 17:02:39 -0800

>> Listen to the story on National Public Radio With Sen. John McCain clinching the Republican presidential nomination, a new Democrat-funded group has already begun an ad campaign labeling him the "McSame" as President Bush. The campaign represents the opening salvo from a consortium of top Democrat donors, operatives and unions who at this point have raised $6.75 million for the election season. The ad campaign is an example of what is expected to be a messy advertising battle between a slew of independently operating liberal and conservative groups, with hundreds of millions of dollars spent on each side. The Center for Investigative Reporting and National Public Radio have traced the flow of money and interwoven connections behind the anti-McCain ads, which are being run by the Campaign to Defend America, a nonprofit set up last year by MoveOn.org co-founder Wes Boyd, among others. The group has been running ads in Erie, Pennsylvania over the past weeks, and plans to spend more than $1 million on the anti-McCain ad, according to a press release. The group's money comes from the Fund for America, a new 527 organization run by major Democrats and top union officials to help coordinate the effort to take back the White House. The Fund's money comes from billionaire investor George Soros ($2.5 million), the Service Employees International Union ($2.5 million), and hedge fund manager Donald Sussman ($1 million), among others. Its leadership includes former President Clinton chief-of-staff John Podesta, Taco Bell heir Rob McKay and executives from SEIU and a national teacher's union. "A trillion dollars in Iraq over the next ten years. McSame as Bush," narrates the ad. "Tell John McCain we need a new direction. Not the McSame old thing." The Campaign to Defend America (CDA) declined repeated requests for interviews. As an independent organization, CDA can raise and spend unlimited amounts of money, as long as it doesn't coordinate with the candidate or party committee that it is helping. CDA uses lawyers who also represent the Democratic National Committee. For example, DNC general counsel Joseph E. Sandler helped incorporate Campaign to Defend America in March 2007, according to documents. Sharing lawyers is usually not a violation of the "coordination" rule, as long as the lawyers don't share or influence strategy, says election lawyer Kenneth Gross. But it can raise the question of the appearance of improper coordination. Gross notes that in 2004, a legal advisor to President Bush's campaign resigned because he had also represented the independent group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. The McCain ad isn't the only production of the Campaign to Defend America. The group is closely affiliated with Americans Against Escalation in Iraq (or "Iraq 2008"), a coalition of liberal groups that ran the "Iraq Summer" campaign last year, which organized grassroots opposition to Republican members of Congress who opposed withdrawal timetables for the war in Iraq. The Americans Against Escalation coalition is an alias for CDA, according to records filed with Washington's secretary of state. The Campaign to Defend America itself is organized as a 501c4 nonprofit organization, a form of tax-exempt group becoming more popular among political operatives because it doesn't have to disclose its donors. As yet, however, the group has not received tax-exempt status by the IRS, according to an IRS spokesman. Unlike 527s like the Fund for America, CDA wouldn't have to disclose who funded its automated calls to voters, which have already received complaints. But running a TV ad about a candidate close to an election has stricter rules, which is why CDA filed papers revealing its funding. In the filings, CDA also claimed a special exemption that would allow it to use stronger wording than other organizations, explicitly urging voters to vote for or against a candidate. Only organizations that don't accept any corporate or union money qualify for that exemption. CDA's funder, the Fund for America, is located at the Service Employee International Union's Washington D.C. headquarters, counts union officials as its directors, and took in $2.5 million in union funds. The Fund for America, however, sent only non-union money to CDA and reimbursed SEIU for staff and office expenses, steps it must take for CDA to follow the letter of the law, according to campaign finance experts. Whether or not CDA may be violating the spirit of the rule—"that's a political or moral question," says Larry Noble, former general counsel to the Federal Election Commission. "Your spirit may be different than mine. People can't be prosecuted for violating the spirit of the law. If you're allowed to do it, you're allowed to do it." >> Listen to NPR's on-air story and view a graphic chart of the money and connections behind the Campaign to Defend America. >> UPDATE: Read new details about film producer Steve Bing's connection to Campaign to Defend America.

NPR story on McCain's lobbyist connections

Carrie Ching — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 12:38:05 -0800

An NPR story this morning sums up Senator John McCain's involvement in a 1999 FCC decision over a TV license deal in Pittsburgh. Whether McCain was acting on behalf of broadcast company lobbyists to influence the FCC's decision when he wrote two letters, urging a vote on the license deal, is the point of contention that surfaced during his 2000 presidential campaign, and again last week in an article by The New York Times. Paxson Communications, a broadcast company with TV stations across the country, was the buyer hoping to acquire a Pittsburgh TV outlet. Pittsburgh community activists opposed the deal, which required approval from the FCC. At the time, Senator McCain chaired the Senate Commerce Committee, which oversees the FCC. McCain had also received at least $30,000 in campaign donations in 1998 and 1999 from company owner Lowell "Bud" Paxson, his family, lawyers, and other company executives. Paxson and allied lobbyists approached McCain in late 1999, asking him to write a letter to the FCC urging a vote on the deal before it expired at the end of the year. According to NPR:

In 2002, McCain recounted the conversation in a deposition on the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law. He said in his deposition that he told Paxson, "I will not write a letter, I cannot write a letter, asking them to approve or deny." But he would be glad to ask them to act, which he did. McCain sent off a strongly worded letter on Nov. 17, and his next letter, on Dec. 11, was even tougher. The commissioners got it just before their year-end meeting. McCain said the five commissioners should each explain in writing if they had acted, and if not, why not. The letter included language, typical for McCain, that he was not trying to influence the decision. But the commission chairman suggested that the senator could have influenced the process and told McCain the letter was "highly unusual."

The FCC commission did vote on the deal, in favor of the Paxson acquisition, but the deal later collapsed. The controversial New York Times story last week about McCain's connection to Paxson lobbyist Vicki Iseman brought this issue back into the media spotlight. NPR's take on the controversy includes a graphic timeline of events, and Vicki Iseman's lobbyist disclosure filing, annotated to show what information is, isn't, and possibly should be included in lobbyist filings. Both the timeline and annotated disclosure form were researched and reported by CIR's staff reporter Will Evans.

Reporting on lobbyists and the presidential campaign

CIR Staff — Tue, 26 Feb 2008 13:37:00 -0800

Nieman Watchdog interviewed CIR staff reporter Will Evans about his ABCNews.com investigation of lobbyists who work as top fundraisers for presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and John McCain. Evans explains how he happened upon the story when he ran the names of top fundraisers, or bundlers, through FARA, the Justice Department database of lobbyists who work for foreign governments. He says the amount of information he found was surprising.

[FARA] is a good tool for reporters. It includes much more information than the records for domestic lobbyists. This goes back to concerns about Nazi propaganda. The Foreign Agents Registration Act [1938] was passed, with tougher rules for anyone lobbying for a foreign country. So every lobbyist for a foreign country has to file these statements saying who they met with, what they did, why they did it, what they’re getting paid exactly. With domestic lobbyists, they may be doing the same thing, but you don’t know because their disclosure is much more limited.

Evans also points out that Republican candidates so far have not disclosed all of their fundraisers. "This is an issue that campaign finance watchdogs are upset about, that there are no mandatory disclosures of bundlers," he says in the interview. "There are mega fundraisers out there who are helping to bankroll this election, and they aren’t just people who like a candidate. Sometimes they are, but other times they represent specific interests and agendas, and it is important to follow that even past the election—what they get for their role in fundraising and the access that may come with that." >> Read the Q&A with Will Evans on Nieman Watchdog.

Lobbyists skirt laws by throwing fundraiser parties at home

Carrie Ching — Fri, 22 Feb 2008 13:46:08 -0800

An investigative piece by USA Today shows how lobbyists and politicians skirt laws banning gifts to lawmakers by using homes owned by lobbying firms to throw fundraiser parties. Reporter Ken Dilanian used invitations, interviews, real estate and Federal Election Commission records to document "400 congressional fundraisers at lobbyist-, corporate- or labor-owned Capitol Hill facilities last year through November, benefiting 214 lawmakers—40% of Congress."

In the past decade, 18 lobbying firms, corporations and labor unions have purchased town houses or leased office space near the Capitol, joining more than a dozen others that had operated there for years, according to real estate records. Despite a strict new ban on gifts to lawmakers, lobbyists routinely use these prime locations to legally wine and dine members of Congress while helping them to raise money, campaign records show. The lawmakers get a venue that is often free or low-cost, a short jaunt from the Capitol. The lobbyists get precious uninterrupted moments with lawmakers—the sort of money-fueled proximity the new lobbying law was designed to curtail. The public seldom learns what happens there because the law doesn't always require fundraising details to be reported.

The price of influence?

Will Evans — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 17:19:47 -0800

Does political fundraising help lobbyists gain influence for their clients? It depends who you ask. Judy A. Black is a fundraiser for Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain. She’s also a Washington lobbyist. Black tells CIR she raises money “for candidates that I want to be in office to serve the public,” not in order to help her lobbying clients. “I don’t see them mixing it all,” Black says. But Professor James A. Thurber of American University says an individual’s fundraising cannot easily be “hermetically sealed” from that person’s lobbying. “The fundraising side opens doors,” he says. The connection, Thurber says, needs to be made transparent, so members of public can judge for themselves. Read CIR’s story on presidential fundraisers lobbying for foreign governments – and judge for yourself.

Web of Influence

Carrie Ching — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 10:50:45 -0800

A CIR web exclusive chart showing which presidential candidates have fundraisers who also work as lobbyists for foreign governments.

Web of Influence: Documents

Carrie Ching — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 01:59:15 -0800

>> Read the story: "Lobbyists for Foreign Governments Raise Money, Get Clinton, McCain Meetings" >> Back to Web of Influence NOTE: A spokesman for Chorba's firm said that Chorba's activities on behalf of China do not constitute lobbying.

Lobbyists for foreign governments raise money, get meetings

Carrie Ching — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 00:39:07 -0800

Top fundraisers for the presidential campaigns of Democrat Hillary Clinton and Republican John McCain lobby on behalf of foreign governments, and in some cases, helped their clients gain access to the senators, according to a CIR and ABCNews.com investigation. >> Read the story on ABCNews.com. >> View CIR's chart "Web of Influence" and source documents.

Bundled donations could hurt candidates

Carrie Ching — Fri, 14 Dec 2007 14:31:48 -0800

Earlier this year, top Clinton fundraiser Norman Hsu was found to be a fugitive avoiding prison for grand theft. A CIR investigation for Politico finds new examples of presidential candidates relying on fundraisers with questionable backgrounds. A fundraiser for Mitt Romney was recently suspended from practicing law. A backer of Barack Obama defaulted on loans. A bundler for Rudy Giuliani was once accused of sexual harassment. And a Clinton fundraiser was barred from contracting for violating labor laws. Does the high-stakes campaign money race attract people with “shady” backgrounds? >> Read the story on Politico.

Lawmakers go behind the scenes to save their earmarks

Carrie Ching — Wed, 07 Nov 2007 12:28:11 -0800

After Democrats won control of Congress, they moved to fulfill their pledge to crack down on the controversial practice of lawmakers slipping projects in spending bills without public scrutiny. In February, they scrapped Republican-drafted bills loaded with earmarks and passed a bill that they boasted had none. Among those celebrating the achievement was Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.), who said that piecing together the $463.5-billion spending bill was difficult, "but we got it done without a single earmark." But the day after President Bush signed it, Reid wrote federal agencies to "strongly support the priorities" in the discarded GOP bills. "I believe they are essential to the nation and to my home state of Nevada." Reid was not alone in seeking to save his earmarks. Lawmakers from both parties -- including Democrats ranging from the most senior, such as Sen. Robert C. Byrd of West Virginia, to one of the most junior, such as Sen. Jon Tester of Montana -- pressed agencies to grant their spending requests, according to correspondence obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the Center for Investigative Reporting. The behind-the-scenes lobbying for projects stripped from this once "earmark-free" bill underscores how difficult it will be for lawmakers to curtail a practice that has expanded despite criticism that it is out of control. Already, lawmakers are seeking to replace lost earmarks in next year's appropriations bills, although they have promised to be more open about it. "What is ironic is that at the same time lawmakers were crowing about no earmarks this year, they were surreptitiously drowning agency heads in funding requests," said Steve Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense. Rep. Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), a leading critic of earmarking and one of the few lawmakers who wants to end the practice, offered a simple explanation: "We're addicts." The Center for Investigative Reporting requested documents from 13 agencies. Five responded: the Environmental Protection Agency, the departments of Labor, Commerce and Interior, and the Air Force. Those agencies provided 122 spending requests from 52 senators and 205 representatives between January -- after Democrats announced they would exclude earmarks -- and April. Federal agencies must fund earmarks lawmakers insert into bills. With the earmarks eliminated, the agencies were free this year to set their own spending priorities. So, lawmakers touted their own requests to influence those decisions. Reid wrote Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne, a former Senate colleague, to ask him to support projects in the Republican-penned Interior bill, which included $200,000 for a Mojave Desert science center and $300,000 to help preserve historic buildings in the frontier mining town of Goldfield, Nev. In a handwritten note, Reid added, "Call if I can ever help." In his letter to Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, wife of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), Reid also added a personal touch, scrawling: "P.S. I'll keep an eye on Mitch." Jim Manley, a spokesman for the majority leader, said Reid and other members of Congress have strong views on how to spend federal dollars in their states. "There's absolutely nothing wrong with communicating these views to the executive branch," he said. Despite the taint attached to the term "earmark," Tester said that he and Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.) recovered millions of dollars "lost when Congress didn't fund specific projects, also known as earmarks." Among the funding they secured: nearly $1 million for the Joe Skeen Institute for Rangeland Restoration at Montana State University. Byrd, one of the Democratic spending bill's principal authors, lauded the bill's restraint. "The legislation does not include earmarks -- hear me -- the legislation does not include earmarks," he said on the Senate floor. But Byrd, chairman of the appropriations committee, who is regarded as a master of pork-barrel politics, then wrote the Interior Department to "strongly urge" funding for 13 projects in his state. The department funded seven, including more than $1 million for a fish hatchery for endangered freshwater mussels. Byrd and other lawmakers have revived their earmarks in the new spending bills now moving through Congress. The senator, for example, inserted $125,000 for the International Mother's Day Shrine building in Grafton, W.Va., in the fiscal 2008 interior appropriations bill. Lawmakers from both parties wrote the Commerce Department seeking $13 million for the National Textile Center, a consortium of universities that conducts research to help U.S. companies remain competitive. The money was not provided. Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) urged the Commerce Department to provide $500,000 for a marine education program that allows students with limited means to learn about Narragansett Bay. "Reed's job is to advocate for the state, and that's what he's doing," said Reed spokesman Chip Unruh. These efforts to bring home the bacon contrast with the election-year pledge Democrats made to reduce earmarks, which numbered more than 13,000 and cost $19 billion in fiscal year 2005. "They say, 'We're not doing earmarks anymore,' but in fact, they really are, by intimidating agencies and departments that are dependent on Congress for their appropriations," said Ronald D. Utt, a senior research fellow for the conservative Heritage Foundation think tank. Byrd spokesman Tom Gavin said the senator was "simply trying to alert the agencies to specific needs in West Virginia." Matt McKenna, a Tester spokesman, said his boss believed the projects he supported were worthwhile. "He wants the process to be conducted with transparency," McKenna said. "The earmarks he doesn't support are the ones slipped in in the dark of night, with no opportunity for public scrutiny." When Democrats won control of Congress last fall, they were left with nine unfinished appropriations bills from the former Republican majority. They decided to pass a single measure with no earmarks to fund most of the government through September, the end of the 2007 fiscal year. It made for smart politics. Earmarks, often inserted in bills anonymously and at the behest of lobbyists, had come under heightened scrutiny after scandals involving now-incarcerated former Rep. Randy "Duke" Cunningham (R-Rancho Santa Fe) and disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff, who referred to the House Appropriations Committee as "the favor factory." The explosion of earmarks under Republican control, such as Alaska's $223-million "bridge to nowhere" connecting Ketchikan to an island with an airport and about 50 inhabitants, also generated public outrage. The day Bush signed the Democratic spending bill, the White House budget director issued a memo to federal departments saying: "Funding decisions should be based on the merits." But critics say that it is difficult for agencies to say no to lawmakers who write their budgets. "These agencies know who butters their bread," Flake said. "They'll be under a lot of pressure to accede to the requests." Although sponsors of earmarks will be identified in the current round of spending bills, the behind-the-scenes lobbying this year on the "earmark-free" bill made that process less transparent. "In the past, there was at least a faint public paper trail in the report accompanying the legislation," said Ellis of Taxpayers for Common Sense. "Even that small shred of disclosure was greater than the letters and phone calls we are not seeing now. As a result, taxpayers may never know where and how much of their money was wasted this year." California lawmakers were among those petitioning for funds. Rep. John Campbell (R-Irvine), whose district would have received $1 million for a water project from the discarded House appropriations bill, appealed to the Interior Department: "I would ask that you call me personally if for any reason you are hesitant to provide funding for this project." Campbell said he didn't consider his action an effort to salvage an earmark. "It's not an earmark because these guys can just say no," he said. Rep. John T. Doolittle (R-Roseville), noting that $1 million had been included in the GOP-drafted bill for a water project in his district, told the Interior Department that "appropriate deference should be given to the clear intent of Congress." Lawmakers' appeals often went nowhere. The EPA's chief financial officer, Lyons Gray, responded to Byrd's request for money for two West Virginia projects by noting that the White House had instructed no earmarks should be funded in the agency's budget. "EPA is committed to being a good steward of our environment and a good steward of our tax dollars," he said. Simon is an LA Times staff writer; Evans is a reporter at the Center for Investigative Reporting in Berkeley.

The king of subsidies

Jonathan Vanian — Tue, 23 Oct 2007 12:49:45 -0700

In conjunction with National Public Radio, the Center for Investigative Reporting helped research and report on one of the largest recipients of federal farm subsidies, the legendary King Ranch of Texas. As NPR’s Peter Overby reports, from 1999-2005 King Ranch raked in $8.3 million in subsidies for growing cotton. Though family owned, King Ranch is probably not what most people would think of as a family farm. It is a politically savvy corporate conglomerate that has its own political action committee and a well-connected lobbyist to help shape this year’s Farm Bill. Out of King Ranch’s 1,200 square miles of land, only 23 are dedicated to growing cotton. Additionally, powerful political figures sit on the ranch’s board of directors, including former Secretary of State James Baker, and Ray Hunt, a Texas oil tycoon with Washington connections who is ranked as one of the richest men in America by Forbes. The ranch’s CEO, Jack Hunt, was appointed to the Texas Water Development Board by then Governor George W. Bush of Texas. Additional reporting by CIR shows that from 1997–2006, King Ranch made at least $960,000 in federal campaign contributions, including soft money. The contributions came from King Ranch’s PAC, executives, and board members. Since 2001, King Ranch spent at least $850,000 on lobbying. To lobby for the Farm Bill, King Ranch hired Katharine Armstrong, whose family owns the ranch where Vice President Dick Cheney accidentally shot attorney Harry Whittington. For all the lobbying power, however, Overby reports that King Ranch hardly cares about the cotton subsidies. The company says it applies for the subsidies because that’s how the cotton industry is set up. In any case, as CEO Jack Hunt tells Overby, “it’s just one piece of our company.”

The King of Subsidies

Carrie Ching — Mon, 22 Oct 2007 15:54:55 -0700

The 150-year-old King Ranch in south Texas helped shape the cowboy image of the American West. Now it's diversified into everything from citrus to pecans. And it's one of the biggest recipients of federal farm subsidies. CIR's Jonathan Vanian contributed research and reporting to this investigation. >> Listen to the story on NPR.

"Back-door earmarks" in NV

Will Evans — Fri, 12 Oct 2007 10:37:04 -0700

The Reno Gazette-Journal used CIR's reporting on hidden earmarks to hold the paper's homestate senators accountable. The story, using documents CIR acquired through the Freedom of Information Act, shows that while Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) boasted of earmark reform, he was lobbying for earmarks behind the scenes. The paper also follows up to see whether the lobbying paid off. CIR also wrote a piece for the IRE Journal, published by Investigative Reporters and Editors, showing how we conducted the earmark investigation and giving tips on FOIA requests. We hope other reporters will use it to demand information to which the public is entitled, and shed light on the inner workings of government.

Senate to Weigh Bill Tying Sugar, Ethanol

Carrie Ching — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:54:11 -0700

As the Senate reconvenes this week, one agenda item will be the regular five-year update of federal farm programs. The House passed its version — all 742 pages of it — just before the August recess. One contentious issue is always sugar, and this year is no different. So far, the sugar producers are winning. Their lobbyists have not only fended off attacks on sugar-price supports, but they've also persuaded the House to give sugar a new break — its own piece of federal ethanol policy. Listen to the story on the NPR site.

Sugar industry lobbies to sweeten farm bill

Will Evans — Tue, 04 Sep 2007 16:39:58 -0700

With the Senate set to debate its version of the farm bill this fall, sugar policy will be a controversial part of the agenda. As NPR’s Peter Overby reports on All Things Considered, sugar growers and their allies in Congress want the government to protect the industry from Mexican imports by diverting surplus sugar into ethanol production. CIR contributed research and reporting for Overby’s piece. The battle over sugar is fought between sugar producers – who want a government-guaranteed, inflated price for sugar – and manufacturers who want low prices for the sugar they use to make food products. The weapons of choice in this battle include, of course, lobbyists and campaign contributions. The Center for Responsive Politics gives a breakdown of contributions from the sugar industry, as well as lobbying expenses. I interviewed lobbyists and sugar farmers at the American Sugar Alliance’s annual schmooze-n-golf symposium at a Napa Valley resort last month. The lunchtime speaker, Rep. Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii), who is featured in the NPR piece, gave a rousing pitch to the sugar crowd to give more money and continue knocking on Capitol Hill doors. Two other friendly members of Congress also attended the conference, as well as former Rep. Larry Combest (R-Texas) who crafted the 2002 farm bill as chair of the House Committee on Agriculture. He’s now a lobbyist for the sugar industry. The sugar fest launched with a morning pep talk from Sen. Norm Coleman (R-Minn.), whose call from his sugar-growing state was piped through speakers over breakfast. As Coleman promised attendees he would fight for the industry’s interests in the Senate farm bill debate, conference-goers had their pick of a wide variety of sugar packets for their morning coffee, including saccharine samples from Hawaii, Florida and Minnesota. No Sweet’N Low in sight.

More pleas for earmarks

Will Evans — Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:11:22 -0700

New documents from the Department of Health and Human Services show that Montana’s Democratic Senators Jon Tester and Max Baucus requested agency funding for 14 pet projects, just days after Congress passed an “earmark-free” spending bill earlier this year. Not to be outdone, Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas) asked for millions of dollars for a list of 17 projects. But Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) beat them both with the sheer amount of money he requested. In a Feb. 20 letter to HHS Secretary Michael O. Leavitt, Byrd wrote to “strongly urge” funding for seven West Virginia earmarks totaling $24 million. The list included $2.7 million for a bioengineering institute at the Robert C. Byrd Biotechnology Science Center and $8 million for a variety of facilities as part of the Robert C. Byrd Health Sciences Center. The HHS documents (which include funding requests from other lawmakers as well) were the latest responses to CIR’s many FOIA requests. We’ll continue to update the earmark resource page as documents roll in.

"Pork is not partisan"

Carrie Ching — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 10:00:00 -0700

The recent article by CIR's Will Evans and LA Times reporter Richard Simon on earmarks sparked an editorial in the Times today, which concludes:

In February, Democrats took the spending bills they had inherited from the Republican Congress and stripped them of all earmarks, with incoming Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) patting himself so hard on the back for his party's fiscal restraint that he was in danger of spraining something. He then turned around and wrote to federal agencies asking them to fund many of the projects that had been eliminated from the bills, according to research by the Center for Investigative Reporting. Reid was far from alone; lawmakers from both parties wrote to agencies appealing for projects in their districts. Back in January, when pork was very much in the public spotlight, the Senate passed a bill requiring disclosure of the names of earmark sponsors. The House simply changed its rules to require disclosure. Since then, the process of reconciling the Senate bill with a similar version passed in the House has stalled. Some senators are disclosing their earmarks anyway, while others refuse. It is a near certainty, though, that unless the practice is codified in law, senators will return to business as usual. House rules, meanwhile, can be altered with each new session of Congress. Attaching names to earmarks won't eliminate them, but it decreases the likelihood that politicians will try to grab funds for something truly outrageous, such as the notorious $223-million Alaskan "bridge to nowhere." The public is still watching; Democrats will pay a political price if they let earmark reform die.

Earmarks

Carrie Ching — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:07:58 -0700

The new Democratic Congress passed a major spending bill earlier this year that it promoted as being stripped of all earmarks and a strike against pork-barrel spending. But even as the bill passed, a joint investigation by CIR and the Los Angeles Times reveals today, top Democrats and members of both parties deluged government agencies with special requests to fund pet projects. CIR obtained congressional correspondence under the Freedom of Information Act showing 122 spending requests from 52 senators and 205 representatives in the wake of that “earmark-free” bill, including multiple letters from Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. >> Read the full Los Angeles Times story by CIR's Will Evans and the Times' Richard Simon. Below, read what four senators said about the 2007 spending bill in public compared to what they wrote to government agencies in private. Sen. Harry Reid (D-Nev.) Publicly said: "Democrats have now accomplished more for fiscal responsibility in six weeks than Republicans managed to achieve in six years. This new Continuing Resolution puts benefits for our nation's veterans and educational opportunities for our nation's children ahead of wasteful spending and special interest pork." -- Statement on passage of Fiscal Year 2007 spending bill, Feb. 14, 2007 Privately said: "I encourage you to use the bill reported out of the Republican-controlled Senate Appropriations Committee during the 109th Congress as guidance when you determine how to allocate your department’s funds in FY2007. I strongly support the priorities included in that bill. I believe they are essential to the nation and to my home state of Nevada." -- Letter to the Interior Department, Feb. 16, 2007 (Similar letters to the Departments of Energy, Commerce, Agriculture, Justice, Housing and Urban Development, Education, and Labor) Senator's response: "Senators and members of Congress from both parties have strong views about how best to prioritize federal spending. There's absolutely nothing wrong with communicating these views to the executive branch.'' -- Reid spokesman Jim Manley Sen. Robert C. Byrd (D-W.Va.) Publicly said: "The legislation does not include earmarks -- hear me -- the legislation does not include earmarks… We will have a temporary moratorium on earmarks until Congress passes the ethics reform bill." -- Senate speech, Feb. 8, 2007 Privately said: "I strongly urge that you give very careful consideration to including support for the following projects and funding levels in the agency’s funding plan." -- Letter to the Department of the Interior, Feb. 16, 2007 (Similar letters to the Departments of Labor, Health & Human Services, Education, and the EPA) Senator's response: Sen. Byrd was “simply trying to alert the agencies to specific needs in West Virginia. Senator Byrd has always maintained that members of Congress know the needs of their states far better than any bureaucrat.” -- Byrd spokesman Tom Gavin Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) Publicly said: "There are no earmarks." -- Senate speech, referring to the Fiscal Year 2007 spending bill, Feb. 13, 2007 Privately said: "I am writing today to ask for your support for an appropriations request that is important to the state of Wisconsin…. The Appropriations Committees provided ample insight as to their expectations.... I encourage you to appropriately recognize and act on those recommendations." -- Letters to the Interior Department, March 7, 2007 (Similar letter to the Department of Health & Human Services) Senator's response: "Senator Kohl fought for the projects in committee, they were vetted projects and good for the state. It’s up to the department’s discretion whether or not to fund the program. And in these cases they did not." -- Kohl spokesman Joe Bonfiglio Sen. Jack Reed (D-R.I.) Publicly said: The spending bill “eliminated billions of dollars worth of special-interest provisions that were inserted into previous appropriations bills with little or no oversight." -- Statement on passage of spending bill, Feb. 15, 2007 Privately said: "I urge you to support the following Rhode Island projects..." -- Letter to the Department of Commerce, Feb. 15, 2007 (Similar letters to the Departments of the Interior and Labor) Senator's response: "Senator Reed's job is to advocate for the state, and that's what he's doing." -- Reed spokesman Chip Unruh
>> See who voted for the spending bill in the Senate and the House >> Read the Administration's memo directing government agencies not to base funding on earmark requests

Let the sunshine in

Will Evans — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0700

Thank you to the Sunlight Foundation’s “Real Time Investigations” project, where Bill Allison and Anupama Narayanswamy are undertaking a massive FOIA inquiry to create a searchable database that would be helpful to other reporters (like me). They’ve sent FOIAs to more than 100 government agencies asking for logs of Congressional correspondence to the federal bureaucracy. The idea is to see what members of Congress are up to as they privately lobby different departments. Responses are trickling in (one agency even sent info on a floppy disk) and Bill and Anu have posted some of the logs in spreadsheet format. For my investigation of earmarks, I used the EPA logs, for example, to spot inquiries relating to the 2007 budget and asked for those specific pieces of mail by control number. I also used the Air Force logs. I think requesting the specific documents probably sped up the FOIA process quite a bit, rather than dumping open-ended requests on beleaguered FOIA officers. When Sunlight starts getting a critical mass of correspondence logs, and posts it all online, it should be a great tool.

GOP likes earmarks too

Will Evans — Tue, 10 Jul 2007 00:00:00 -0700

While Democrats patted themselves on the back for their "earmark-free" spending bill earlier this year, some Republicans accused them of sneaking hidden earmarks into the bill. Now, as the CIR/Los Angeles Times investigation shows, some of the self-congratulatory Democrats were personally lobbying for pet projects around the time the bill was passed. It turns out that some of the critical Republicans were too. Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.), for example, lambasted the Democrats for a "deceptive" bill "packed with special interest earmarks, legislative gimmicks, and billions in new spending." Soon after, Campbell wrote the Interior Department asking for money for a water project in his district -- one of the earmarks that was eliminated in the Democrat-crafted bill. He asked that officials “call me personally if for any reason you are hesitant to provide funding for this Project.” For the record, Campbell has been up front about his own appetite for earmarks, even as he continues to criticize Democratic pork. As the L.A. Times story explains, "Campbell said he didn't consider his action an effort to salvage an earmark. 'It's not an earmark because these guys can just say no,' he said." In the end, Campbell’s project didn’t get funded. So, he's trying again for 2008.

The McConnell Machine

Fri, 02 Mar 2007 12:37:49 -0800

Kentucky Republican Senator Mitch McConnell is slated to become the Senate’s new Majority Leader if the Republicans maintain control of the Senate in the November 2006 election. His rise to power has long been linked to his prowess as a fundraiser. This investigation -- run in four parts -- offers an exclusive look by Herald-Leader reporter and author John Cheves into the inner workings of Senator McConnell's fundraising operations. Cheves, who has covered McConnell from Kentucky for years, reviewed thousands of corporate and government documents, and interviewed scores of people in Washington and, by telephone, around the country - from McConnell himself to current and former aides, current and former senators from both parties, lobbyists, clients of lobbyists, donors, political party operatives, campaign-finance advocates and others who have dealt with or simply observed McConnell during his 22 years in the Senate. PART ONE: October 15, 2006 Price tag politics Senator McConnell's pet issue: money and the power it buys. PART TWO: October 18, 2006 Foreign aid wins friends A senator's generosity is rewarded. PART THREE: October 20, 2006 Two for the money When McConnell's pull fails, his labor secretary wife fills in. PART FOUR: October 22, 2006 A lucrative connection A lobbyist's close ties to the senator pay off for them both -- and clients. Visit the Lexington Herald-Leader's website for more information on this series, including documents used in the investigation and a special report on McConnell's relationship to the pharmaceutical industry.