New Jersey: Democrats file complaint over GOP websites | Philadelphia Inquirer

South Jersey Democratic organization has filed a federal complaint against a Republican campaign group working to reelect U.S. Rep. Frank LoBiondo, saying it had co-opted his Democratic challenger’s name on a “deceptive” website to solicit donations. Republicans countered Monday by attacking the challenger, Democrat Bill Hughes Jr., for his association with retiring U.S. Rep. Robert E. Andrews (D., N.J.). The website complaint, brought by Atlantic County Democratic Chairman Jim Schroeder, asks the Federal Election Commission to investigate “fraudulent” activity by the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC). It also names LoBiondo and his campaign as respondents.

National: Will McCutcheon Replay Citizens United? | Roll Call

Four years after the Supreme Court deregulated independent campaign spending in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the high court is poised to yet again turn American elections upside down. The court is expected to rule any day now on McCutcheon v. FEC, another potentially landmark constitutional challenge that could shake up campaign financing as dramatically as Citizens United did in 2010. While no one can predict how the court will rule, oral arguments in October suggest that conservatives in the majority remain as eager as ever to dismantle money limits. At issue in McCutcheon is the constitutionality of existing overall limits on how much a contributor may give to candidates and political parties in a single election cycle. Alabama businessman Shaun McCutcheon, who brought the challenge, argues that the $123,200 cap on total contributions per cycle violates his First Amendment rights.

National: Hillary Clinton foes file FEC complaint | POLITICO

An anti-Hillary Clinton group has filed a Federal Election Commission complaint against the former secretary of state and an independent group promoting her potential 2016 presidential bid. In what election law experts say is a long-shot argument, the hybrid PAC, titled the ‘Stop Hillary PAC,’ claims that Clinton and her political team have essentially authorized a campaign by renting her official resources to a super PAC. The Wednesday complaint singled out Clinton and the super PAC Ready for Hillary — a group that is urging Clinton to run for president but is forbidden by law from coordinating with Clinton or her staff. At issue, according to Stop Hillary lawyer Dan Backer, is whether Clinton is tacitly supporting a committee that’s aiming to “draft” her for president. “Ready for Hillary is in the business of trying to get Hillary Clinton to run for office — essentially to draft her for office. And that’s their right to do so, provided the object of their draft — Hillary — isn’t behind it or helping them, because then it stops being a draft committee and becomes an authorized campaign committee,” he said in a statement, going on to suggest that she and the committee are in violation of campaign finance law.

Texas: ‘Dark Money’ debate rekindled | Houston Chronicle

Lawyer and lobbyist Steve Bresnen is asking Texas’ campaign finance regulators to shine a light on secret campaign spending in state elections. Reinvigorating the debate over dark money spending in the Lone Star State, Bresnen filed a petition for rulemaking with the Texas Ethics Commission on Tuesday asking the state panel to ensure “all contributors of money used to influence elections would be disclosed.” (read full the petition here). “The purpose of my proposal is to eliminate ‘dark money’ from Texas elections by dragging it into the sunlight,” Bresnen wrote to acting Executive Director Natalia Luna Ashley. “Secret money influencing elections — the life blood of self governance — is intolerable as a matter of law and is against the public interest. The Commission should exercise its authority to do something about it.”

Editorials: Dangerous Inaction by the Election Commission | New York Times

For all its signature dysfunction, the Federal Election Commission has a staff of professionals working to track big money and shady behavior in the nation’s congressional and presidential campaigns. A dramatic — and until now overlooked — example of good staff work surfaced this month in a finding that Crossroads GPS, the shadowy, money-raising monolith of Karl Rove and other Republican strategists, probably broke the election law in 2010 when it claimed that much of its blatantly partisan campaign activities were “social welfare” initiatives.

Arizona: Citizen proof request rejected by federal election commission | Havasu News

In a rebuff to state officials, the head of the federal Elections Assistance Commission has rejected Arizona’s request to require proof of citizenship by those using a federal form to register to vote. In a 46-page order late Friday, Alice Miller, the commission’s acting director, said Congress was within its rights to conclude that those seeking to vote need not first provide documentary proof of eligibility. Miller said the affidavit of citizenship, coupled with criminal penalties for lying, are sufficient. Friday’s ruling is yet another significant setback for Arizona’s effort to enforce the 2004 voter-approved law. The state had argued all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court it has a constitutional right to demand citizenship proof, only to be rebuffed last year. But the justices, in their 7-2 ruling, said state officials were free to petition the EAC to add the requirement to the form. Friday’s order forecloses that option.

Idaho: FEC: Former Senator Craig Ignored Warnings, Spent Money Illegally | ABC

Federal Election Commission lawyers urged a federal judge not to heed U.S. Sen. Larry Craig’s contention that regulators are being too hard on him — and to force him to pay nearly $360,000 in fines and restitution for tapping campaign accounts for his legal defense following his 2007 arrest in an airport bathroom sex sting. The FEC, which announced its latest legal filing Friday, says the Idaho Republican ignored the U.S. Senate’s own warnings not to spend the money. Craig also has acknowledged the campaign didn’t seek out FEC guidance on whether he should spend the money or not because he was worried it would tell him not to do it, its lawyers wrote.

National: Congress, FEC meet about security breakdowns | Center for Public Integrity

Federal Election Commission staff today traveled to Capitol Hill and briefed congressional officials investigating the beleaguered agency on how it intends to address recent computer security and staffing problems, officials from both government bodies confirmed. The FEC’s contingent was led by Alec Palmer, who doubles as the agency’s staff and information technology director. It wasn’t immediately clear how many congressional officials participated in the meetings, although a spokesman for Rep. Robert Brady, D-Pa., confirmed to the Center for Public Integrity that his office participated. Brady, along with Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., last week called for separate inquiries into the FEC’s recent woes, which include an October infiltrationinto its computer systems by Chinese hackers. Brady is the ranking member on the Committee on House Administration, which has FEC oversight powers.

National: Campaign Activists Blast FEC Decision on Crossroads | Wall Street Journal

Campaign-finance activists vowed to take the Federal Election Commission to court Thursday after it disregarded a finding by its staff that Crossroads GPS, conservative nonprofit backed by Karl Rove, likely broke campaign laws during the 2010 elections. On Friday, the FEC quietly released a legal opinion by its staff lawyers that found that the “major purpose” of Crossroads GPS was to elect federal candidates, despite being registered as a “social-welfare” nonprofit group. The FEC’s general counsel recommended holding a formal investigation into the group. However, the FEC decided not to take any action after a deadlocked 3-3 vote by its commissioners along party lines. On Thursday, that decision drew sharp criticism from campaign-finance activists.

National: Hacking attempt draws congressional investigation of FEC | Center for Public Integrity

Two congressional leaders — one Republican and one Democrat — are calling for investigations into Federal Election Commission computer security and operational breakdowns that the Center for Public Integrity detailed in a recent report. The report revealed that Chinese hackers crashed the FEC’s computer information technology systems in October just as the federal government shut down, and that the agency is suffering from chronic staffing shortages. A subsequent audit the FEC commissioned revealed a variety of other security issues. “The revelations that FEC IT systems were compromised raises serious concerns,” said Rep. John Mica, R-Fla., chairman of the House Government Operations Subcommittee which oversees federal IT matters. “I am working with my staff and the staff of the full House Oversight and Government Reform Committee to investigate the extent of the breaches, and I intend to conduct a full and thorough review of the vulnerabilities of FEC systems which should raise concerns for all federal elected officials.”

Voting Blogs: Fundraising and Corruption in the Arguments about McCutcheon | More Soft Money Hard Law

Public Citizen attempts to make the case that the Supreme Court’s pending decision inMcCutcheon could, if wrongly decided, unleash a flood of money with the probable effect of corrupting the political process. The argument is the one heard before in briefs and in oral argument about joint fundraising committees. A donor who gives to a joint fundraising committee can write a check for millions, to be apportioned within the limits among all the joint fundraising participants. Public Citizen warns against “naïveté”: the more “practical” view it urges is that the officeholder who solicits for the joint fundraising committee risks corruptive indebtedness to the donor. This is a plausible policy argument, but not clearly one best directed to the Supreme Court or sufficient to carry the constitutional position Public Citizen is advocating. Public Citizen is relying on a hypothetical (which is another way of saying that no record exists to suggest that it is realistic) and on a particular understanding of corruption and fundraising that does not capture the complexities of Congress’ treatment of the issue in reform measures over the years.

Iowa: State Senator: Confirm nominees so fraud work can be investigated | The Des Moines Register

An Iowa senator asked a U.S. Senate committee Wednesday to confirm appointees to a federal election commission so a decision can be made about whether Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz is properly using money for voter fraud investigations. Schultz, a Republican, last year agreed to pay the Iowa Division of Criminal investigation up to $280,000 over two years to investigate voter fraud. A review of those voter fraud investigations last month by The Des Moines Register found fewer than 20 cases in which charges were brought against alleged cheats and just five cases in which Iowans were convicted of election-related offenses. Sen. Tom Courtney, a Democrat, questions whether the use of the money sent to Iowa as part of the Help America Vote Act was legal. Courtney said the funds are intended for education about voting procedures, voter rights and technology, and not for “a voter fraud goose chase.”

Editorials: The Constitution in 2014: Election rules | Lyle Denniston/Constitution Daily

America enters the election year 2014 with considerable uncertainty about two major constitutional issues: what will the rules be for financing the federal campaign, and what is the outlook for minority and poor voters at the ballot box?  Two controversial Supreme Court decisions will have a continuing impact: the ruling four years ago in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, and the decision last June in Shelby County v. Holder. It is not too much to say that the money side of national politics has been turned upside down by the Citizens United decision – a ruling that, after a century of restrictions on political financing by corporations and labor unions, turned them loose to spend as much as they liked as long as they did so independently from candidates running for Congress and the Presidency.

National: New Law Brings Major Changes to the FEC’s Administrative Fine Program – and New Challenges for Independent Expenditures | In the Arena

On December 26, President Obama signed into law a bill to extend the Federal Election Commission’s administrative fine program.  The new law broadens the program significantly, in ways that will especially affect those who make independent expenditures. The administrative fine program allows the FEC to collect fines on a streamlined basis, and on fixed schedules, when political committees fail timely to file their regular periodic reports, or when candidate committees fail timely to file their last-minute contribution (or “48-hour”) reports.  While the program places strict limits on when a respondent can challenge a fine, it has generally been regarded as successful, and has largely avoided partisan or ideological controversy.

Wyoming: Conservative group battles Federal Election Commission over election law | Star-Tribune

A conservative Wyoming-based group hopes to battle the Federal Election Commission in the U.S. Supreme Court in an effort to change federal election laws. The group, Free Speech, has been hammering at the agency in Wyoming’s federal district and federal appeals courts since the 2012 presidential election. Both courts dismissed the case, prompting Free Speech to petition the Supreme Court on Monday. Free Speech hopes a Supreme Court decision will limit an alleged burden on political speech while giving small-money, politically active groups a chance to compete with big-name, high-dollar political groups in Washington. The FEC claims it doesn’t impede the First Amendment or grassroots groups. “The members of Free Speech are three men from Wyoming who aspire to share their views about ranching, President Obama and other topics with the public on a shoestring budget,” Free Speech’s legal counsel wrote in the petition. “Federal election law made this task impossible by requiring compliance with regulatory standards that even the FEC could not articulate and, when applied, impose a regulatory regime far too burdensome for most citizens.”

National: Federal Election Commission Faces Serious Security Failings, with Few Plans to Remedy | Infosecurity

Just weeks after the US Department of Energy was shown to have disregarded proper cybersecurity measures, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) is facing what an independent auditor calls “significant deficiencies” when it comes to its cybersecurity posture. The FEC in fact remained at “high risk for future network intrusions”. However, the electoral watchdog said that it has little interest in implementing even minimum IT security controls. The audit firm, Leon Snead & Co., said in the audit that the FEC’s IT security program does not meet government-wide best practice minimum requirements in many areas. That includes carrying out due diligence information as part of an organization-wide risk management program, using the risk management tools and techniques to implement and maintain modern safeguards and countermeasures, and ensuring the necessary resilience to support ongoing federal responsibilities, critical infrastructure applications and continuity of government in the event of an attack.

National: The futility of the Federal Election Commission | Dallas Morning News

A six-month study by the watchdog Center for Public Integrity has reached sobering, even depressing, conclusions about an agency that should be one of the bulwarks of our democracy. Among the findings:

*The FEC has “reached a paralyzing all-time low in its ability to reach consensus.” The six-member commission operates with three Republicans and three Democrats. And often over the past several years, there have only been four or five commissions. Because four votes are required to take any action, and we live in highly-polarized times, there’s…wait for the shock…gridlock.

National: Federal Election Commission still in ‘significant’ danger of hacking | Center for Public Integrity

The Federal Election Commission’s computer and IT security continues to suffer from “significant deficiencies,” and the agency remains at “high risk,” according to a new audit of the agency’s operations. “FEC’s information and information systems have serious internal control vulnerabilities and have been penetrated at the highest levels of the agency, while FEC continues to remain at high risk for future network intrusions,” independent auditor Leon Snead & Company of Rockville, Md., writes. The audit, released today, comes less than two weeks after a Center for Public Integrity investigation that revealed Chinese hackers infiltrated the FEC’s IT systems during the initial days of October’s government shutdown — an incursion that the agency’s new leadership has vowed to swiftly address. The Chinese hacking attack is believed by FEC leaders and Department of Homeland Security officials to be the most serious act of sabotage in the agency’s 38-year history.

National: Weird Loophole Allows Corporations to Incentivize Employee Contributions to Corporate PACs | Nonprofit Quarterly

U.S. corporations cannot give money directly to political action committees, but individuals can. Can corporations find a way around the prohibition? Of course they can! That’s what loopholes are for. Bloomberg News reports that corporations are getting their employees to donate to PACs in return for the corporations making matching contributions to the employees’ choices of charities. Among the corporations doing this according to Bloomberg are Wal-Mart, Coca-Cola, Boeing, and Hewlett-Packard. The loophole isn’t just a recent discovery. The practice was specifically approved by the Federal Election Commission in the late 1980s and has been reviewed and approved by the FEC seven times between 1994 and 2009. It is also a practice that is reprehensible, clearly intended to skirt the intention of the law. Election law prohibits corporations from reimbursing employees for their PAC donations, either directly or indirectly, but the corporations are making the case that making donations to charities is different than offering employees reimbursement, bonuses, or other compensation.

National: Chinese hackers attacked Federal Election Commission website | CNN

Chinese hackers tapped into the Federal Election Commission’s website during the federal government shutdown in October, a report released Tuesday by an investigative news organization says. The report from the Center for Public Integrity, one of the country’s oldest and largest nonpartisan, nonprofit investigative news organizations, indicates that hackers crashed the FEC’s computer systems, which compiles federal election campaign finance information like contributions to parties and candidates, and how those billions of dollars are spent in each election by candidates, political parties, and independent groups such as political action committees. The attack came as nearly all of the FEC’s employees, except for the presidential-appointed commissioners, were furloughed due to the government shutdown, with not even one staffer being deemed “necessary to the prevention of imminent threats” to federal property. And it came a few months after an independent auditor hired by the government warned that the FEC’s computer systems were at “high risk” to infiltration, a charge the commission disputed.

Iowa: State auditor: Use of federal funds for voter fraud investigations might not be appropriate | Iowa City Press Citizen

The nearly $150,000 that Iowa Secretary of State Matt Schultz’s office has spent on a long-running voter fraud investigation may not be an appropriate use of federal money, the state auditor suggested in a letter released today. In the letter, a deputy to State Auditor Mary Mosiman recommends that Schultz’s office develop a plan to repay the costs associated with the investigation if a federal election commission decides criminal investigations are not an allowed use for funds provided under the Helping America Vote Act. The issue centers on an agreement between the Secretary of State’s Office and the Iowa Division of Criminal Investigations, in place since July, 2012, under which a DCI agent is assigned full time to investigate cases of voter fraud. To date, that effort has yielded charges in 16 cases and five guilty pleas at a cost of about $150,000.

National: Massive Chinese Hacking Attack on FEC Computers Exposes Deep Agency Dysfunction | AllGov

Few Americans would argue that the “D” in Washington, DC, might well stand for “dysfunction”—but it’s especially true when it comes to one government agency in particular: the Federal Election Commission (FEC). The FEC has been something of a mess for quite some time, due to partisan infighting among its commissioners and lack of help from Congress or the White House. There are six commissioners and no more than three can be from the same party. But things took a turn for the truly ugly during the government shutdown in October, when Chinese hackers took advantage of federal employees being furloughed, leaving no one around at the FEC to mind its computer network. Indeed, every one of its 339 employees had been sent home. The cyber-attack—possibly the worst act of sabotage in its four-decade history—reportedly crippled the commission’s systems that inform the public about the billions of dollars raised and spent each election cycle by candidates, parties and political action committees.

Voting Blogs: More about the FEC’s Troubles | More Soft Money Hard Law

The Federal Election Commission has unquestionably had its full share of troubles. And on the agency’s role and performance—about which there is unceasing disagreement—certain points deserve general acceptance: that the FEC’s computers should not be hacked, its Commissioners should not act spitefully toward one another, and it should be provided a reasonable amount of money with which to carry out its functions. Dave Levinthal of the Center for Public Integrity makes just these points, among others, and so far so good; but then he presents a dubious history of the FEC that will confuse readers about the sources of its problems and the reasons why “reform” of the agency is elusive. Has the FEC, rent apart by ideological differences, engaged in unseemly squabbling in recent years? It is fair to say so, and it is good to hear freshly confirmed Commissioner Goodman suggest that there is no reason for Commissioners to be disagreeable in their expression of otherwise sincerely held differences of opinion. But the Levinthal piece goes farther and re-writes the history of the agency to suggest that in the 1990s the agency was doing its job and transcending partisanship among its Commissioners, only to fall to earth and into disrepute in the following decade. A “golden age,” one is led to believe: “during the 1990s…the FEC’s stature soared,” and while Republican and Democratic Commissioners “certainly disagreed from time to time…they could find enough commonality to cobble four votes together and take action.”

National: Federal Election Commission attacked by Chinese hackers during government shutdown | ITProPortal.com

The Federal Election Commission was hit by a massive cyberattack hours after the government shutdown began, according to a report from the Center for Public Integrity. The CPI report claimed the Chinese were behind “the worst act of sabotage” in the agency’s 38-year history. Three government officials involved in the investigation confirmed the attack to CPI, and the FEC acknowledged the incident in a statement. However, the CPI report did not explain why the officials believed China was involved, or provide any details of the network intrusion beyond the fact that attackers crashed several FEC computer systems. When asked for a statement, FEC referred Security Watch to the Department of Homeland Security and did not provide any information. The fact that an attack during the 16-day shutdown occurred should not be a big surprise, since many security experts had warned that attackers might take advantage of IT personnel being furloughed to launch an attack. With less people watching the networks, there was a lot of opportunity for attackers. In fact, the FEC had furloughed all 339 agency employees as none of its staff had been considered “necessary to the prevention of imminent threats” to federal property, according to CPI.

Editorials: How Washington starves its election watchdog | Center for Public Integrity

Just after the federal government shut down Oct. 1, and one of the government’s more dysfunctional agencies stopped functioning altogether, Chinese hackers picked their moment to attack. They waylaid the Federal Election Commission’s networks. They crashed computer systems that publicly disclose how billions of dollars are raised and spent each election cycle by candidates, parties and political action committees. As minutes turned to hours, the FEC found itself largely defenseless against what may be the worst act of sabotage in its 38-year history. The government had furloughed all 339 agency employees, save for the presidentially appointed commissioners, and not even one staffer had been deemed “necessary to the prevention of imminent threats” to federal property, the minimum measure for keeping someone on the job.

National: Corporate campaign contributions issue falls off SEC regulatory agenda | Al Jazeera

Advocates for more transparency in the political system were dealt another blow this week as the Securities and Exchange Commission dropped a potential rule on the disclosure of corporate campaign contributions from its 2014 agenda. The regulatory agency, which is mandated to protect investors, is required by law to submit its agenda for the next year to the Office of Management and Budget. A conspicuous absence this time was consideration of a rule that would require publicly traded companies to disclose the specifics of their political spending to shareholders — an item that was included in the SEC’s 2013 agenda but was never acted upon. Individuals, interest groups, and corporations can write to the SEC to show they are in favor or opposed to proposed regulations. This particular provision garnered more than 600,000 public comments, more than any other rule in the SEC’s history, mostly written in favor of more disclosure. That fact alone makes the SEC’s decision all the more disappointing to those agitating for reform.

National: FEC Deadlocks on Bitcoin Contributions, Tea Party Reporting Exemption | In the Arena

At today’s public meeting, the Federal Election Commission deadlocked on two advisory opinion requests and approved a third. Both deadlocked votes split along party lines between the Democratic- and Republican-selected Commissioners. The Commission first considered a request from the Conservative Action Fund PAC that was held over from last week’s meeting. The request asked whether and how political committees may accept contributions in the form of Bitcoins. While the Commissioners all agreed that committees may accept Bitcoin contributions, they were divided on whether committees could spend Bitcoins, and what steps must be taken to receive and report them. The three Republican-selected Commissioners all voted for a draft opinion that would have allowed political committees not only to accept Bitcoins as in-kind contributions, but also to use them to purchase goods and services and make contributions to other committees. However, the three Democratic-selected Commissioners argued that the Commission should take more time to understand the technology of Bitcoin and issue guidance through a policy statement or interpretive rule. All six Commissioners seemed open to considering such a rule in the future.

National: Tea party group to make case for donor anonymity | Washington Times

A clash between the public’s right to know and fears of political persecution will play out when the Federal Election Commission on Thursday takes up a request from a leading tea party group that it be exempt from disclosure laws to protect its financial supporters from harassment. The FEC is set to vote on whether to exempt the Tea Party Leadership Fund (TPLF) from campaign disclosure laws in light of the group’s claims that its donors have faced “sustained harassment and severe hostility” and should have the right to give anonymously. The TPLF, which operates both a traditional political action committee and a “super PAC” for independent political expenditures, is arguing that its donors have been subject to harsh criticism from the federal government and the general public and that having to reveal their identity would only open them to further harassment.

National: What A Bitcoin Political Debut Could Mean For Transparency | Capital Public Radio

Bitcoin, the virtual currency that exists as alphanumeric strings online, is on the verge of getting into politics. The Federal Election Commission is expected to vote Thursday on a proposal to allow bitcoin contributions to political action committees — even as skeptics say that bitcoins could undermine the disclosure standards of federal law. The FEC is acting as other federal agencies are also exploring the uses, and dangers, of digital currency. At a Senate hearing on Monday, federal law enforcement officials cited Silk Road, an online illegal marketplace that used bitcoin before it was shut down. Edward Lowery III, chief of the Secret Service Criminal Investigative Division, told the panel: “While digital currencies may provide potential benefits, they present real risks through their use by the criminal and terrorist organizations trying to conceal their illicit activity.” Still, no one at the Senate hearing wanted to stifle virtual currency, and neither does the FEC. The commission was brought into the issue by the Conservative Action Fund, a political action committee that is seeking approval to accept bitcoins as contributions.

National: Soon You’ll Be Able To Buy Politicians With Digital Cash | Huffington Post

The digital currency Bitcoin is perhaps best known for its use in buying illegal drugs from online stores like the now-defunct Silk Road. An upcoming Federal Election Commission ruling will expand what you can buy with bitcoins into a strictly legal realm: purchasing politicians. The FEC is set to approve an advisory opinion this week allowing federal political campaigns to accept contributions in bitcoins. The agency will treat bitcoins the same way it treats donations of stock, as an in-kind gift worth the amount at which it was valued at the time of contribution. Bitcoins were valued at about $376 each (as of this writing), and the maximum contribution an individual may make to one campaign is $2,600 per election. The advisory opinion comes in response to the Conservative Action Fund, whose request was filed by conservative election lawyer Dan Backer. He is the force behind a number of recent deregulatory advisory opinion requests and court challenges, including the initial FEC filing that led to the pending Supreme Court case McCutcheon v. FEC. Backer asked the FEC whether the Conservative Action Fund could accept bitcoins as contributions as well as use bitcoins to pay expenses and to make contributions to other candidates.