Blog
NY Reform
By ReformNY – 02/10/12
Crossposted on ReformNY.
Every Friday, the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest news concerning the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics — and the ongoing need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll also be linking to dispatches from around the country highlighting the national scope of this crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Matthew Ladd and Dan Rockoff.
For more stories on an ongoing basis, follow the Twitter hashtag #moNeYpolitics
NY Campaign Finance
1. A new report issued by NYPIRG identifies a “core group” of 127 donors who each gave $50,000 or more to state candidates and party committees in 2011, for a grand total of $16.8 million. Of the 127 deep-pocketed donors, the largest — a New York City property development group — contributed nearly $700,000 in total, and several organizations made single contributions in excess of $100,000. The report highlights New York’s chronically lax laws governing “housekeeping” and soft money accounts, which allows individual donors to skirt the $150,000 ceiling on individual giving. The full report can be seen here.
2. A coalition of more than 100 organizations, including policy institutes, community groups, and labor and religious organizations, delivered a letter to Gov. Cuomo expressing their strong support for public financing in New York state elections, and calling on the governor to “press hard for the creation of a robust public financing program” during the upcoming year.
3. The Wall Street Journal finds that Gov. Cuomo has built strong relationships with public interest groups committed to campaign finance, ethics, and disclosure reform, citing his hiring of Jeremy Creelan, a former deputy director at the Brennan Center, as special counsel for public integrity and ethics issues. The liaison was instrumental in the governor’s overhaul of state ethics laws last year, and reformers hope it will continue to bear fruit in upcoming legislative campaigns.
4. State Senator Liz Krueger is publicly calling for an end to political spending by “ghost campaigns,” which allow Albany’s lawmakers to spend campaign funds long after they’ve retired from office — and, in at least one case, after they’ve passed away. The article highlights continued spending by the campaign committees of former Rep. Eric Massa, who resigned in 2010, as well as the re-election committee of former State Sen. Ron Stafford, who passed away in 2005. “Politicians shouldn’t be able to keep hundreds of thousands of dollars of campaign money hoarded years after their own careers end,” Sen. Krueger said. “It’s an invitation to corruption.”
5. US Congressman Joe Crowley (D–NY) was singled out this week as a top Democratic beneficiary of a private equity PAC with a history of spending on behalf of Republicans. The PAC, formed in 2007 by some of the country’s biggest private equity firms, has drawn unwelcome media attention since it emerged that Bain Capital, where Mitt Romney made his fortune, was one of its founding members.
6. Pay-to-play politics is alive and well in New York, as the Daily News reports that freshman US Congressman Michael Grimm (R–NY), seven months after sponsoring a bill to permit a natural gas pipeline under Jacob Riis Park in Queens, has received contributions from the pipeline’s developers. Two weeks ago, the New York Times also reported that Rep. Grimm was drawing scrutiny for allegedly soliciting campaign donations above the legal limit, and for enlisting the help of a fundraiser now under federal investigation for embezzlement.
Campaign Finance News Nationwide
1. On Tuesday, President Obama signaled that he would not oppose spending on his campaign’s behalf by Priorities USA Action, the super PAC that backs his re-election bid. Aides to the President confirmed that he planned to allow cabinet members, senior advisors and top campaign staff to speak at fundraising events led by Priorities USA. The decision was condemned by many as an about-face by an administration that has criticized the use of super PACs — but has also prompted at least one writer to observe that the decision presents a unique opportunity for Obama to make campaign finance reform a centerpiece of his election campaign.
2. Media mogul and philanthropist Leo Hindery, Jr., argues for a strong link between campaign finance reform and renewed corporate responsibility, proposing that national reform efforts should include not only stronger disclosure rules for corporate contributions and lobbyists, but also voluntary efforts by business leaders not to use corporate funds to influence elections. Such an approach, Hindery writes, would help to reclaim corporate responsibility as a duty extending to “employees, shareholders, customers, communities and the nation.
3. A new poll released Wednesday by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner finds strong support — by a 2-to-1 margin — for the Fair Elections Now Act, which would allow federal candidates who agree to contribution limits to receive public matching funds for donations from residents of their home states. The poll also finds that voters would be more likely to re-elect representatives who voted in favor of a campaign finance reform package that included the Fair Elections Now Act.
4. Politico reports that two PACs have used shell corporations to circumvent existing laws on fundraising and spending, making campaign committees into “black boxes” for anonymous contributions. According to the report, the Alliance for New America, which raised money for John Edwards in 2008 and now plays a supporting role in his trial, created an LLC through which it funneled much of its spending, while Restore Our Future, the super PAC supporting Mitt Romney, accepted donations through shell corporations, allowing the names of donors to remain hidden.
5. Two recent reports highlight the corrosive potential of so-called “c4s” (after their 501(c)4 tax code designation), the “social welfare” arms of super PACs, to raise and spend money without disclosing their donors to the FEC. Based on their IRS filings, such groups have begun to play a bigger role in direct independent spending than supporters of campaign finance reform had expected, and their ability to filter money from contributors to their associated super PACs means that some super PAC spending is virtually untraceable. A report recently issued by Demos and the US PIRG Education Fund found that out of 10 super PACs active in the 2012 elections, 6 had received money from untraceable sources.
Tags: Democracy, Campaign Finance Reform, NY Reform
By ReformNY – 02/03/12
Crossposted at ReformNY.
Every Friday, the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest news concerning the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics — and the ongoing need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll also be linking to dispatches from around the country highlighting the national scope of this crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Dan Rockoff.
For more stories on an ongoing basis, follow the Twitter hashtag #moNeYpolitics
NY Campaign Finance:
1. Today, over 100 organizations that support Fair Elections for New York wrote Governor Cuomo detailing the need for publicly financed campaigns, lower contribution limits, and better enforcement. The civil rights, business, faith, grassroots community, good government, environmental, and labor organizations who signed the letter, thanked the Governor for his strong support and expressed their enthusiasm to work with him and members of the Legislature to pass publicly financed elections and other campaign finance reforms during this legislative session.
2. Despite the annual $150,000 contribution limit by individuals to candidates in New York, luxury-apartment mogul Leonard Litwin gave almost $700,000 to candidates in 2011. A study by the New York Public Interest Research Group revealed that Litwin was the biggest individual donor in the state. Litwin was able to dodge the state’s campaign finance laws by utilizing the limited liability company (LLC) loophole, which allows companies to contribute multiple times through affiliated LLC’s, even when the LLC is completely controlled by a corporation or individual who has already reached the maximum contribution limit.
3. Governor Cuomo spoke with reporters about the need for public financing and campaign finance reform after participating in a fundraising event for the Democratic Governors Association. “One of the things we have to work on is getting money out of politics,” Cuomo said. In response to a reporter’s question about the meeting, Cuomo replied, “Your issue of, ‘You are in a room where people contribute money’ — that is the current state of politics and that is (the case for) every elected official in every fundraising forum.”
4. Manuel Ortega, law chairman of the Staten Island Democratic Party, filed a complaint with the FEC against Republican Representative Michael Grimm. The complaint alleges excessive and illegal cash contributions. A key fundraiser of Grimm’s is now being investigated for embezzling millions of dollars from a rabbi’s congregation. According to the New York Times story that Ortega used as the basis for his FEC complaint, unnamed followers allege that Grimm sought donations over the legal limit, and that he sought those donations in cash and from undocumented aliens.
5. The Democrat and Chronicle calls for Governor Cuomo to follow through on his election promises for public financing and campaign finance reform. The newspaper notes that “the governor continues to say the right things” and urges him to “prod the Legislature to deliver.”
Other News Nationwide:
1. In his State of the Union address, President Obama spoke about the “corrosive influence of money in politics.” He called for “a bill that bans insider trading by Members of Congress,” places limits on incumbents’ ability to own stocks in industries they impact, and restricts the ability of bundlers to lobby Congress.
2. The New York Times editorializes that under the federal lobbying law, “Newt Gingrich can legitimately claim that he is not a lobbyist.” The paper stated that Gingrich had “made a great deal of money in Washington peddling his influence, while carefully staying about half-an-inch short of the legal definition of lobbyist.” The paper calls for a better law limiting lobbyist activity and promoting disclosure. Part of the problem is that many Members of Congress use the revolving door—more than 400 former members have become lobbyists or consultants in the last decade.
3. In Massachusetts, Senator Scott Brown and likely Democratic opponent Elizabeth Warren agreed on a plan to stop outside groups from running negative ads. The agreement “requires each side to donate to a charity of the other’s choosing” when benefiting from a third-party ad, and also requires each side to write to outside groups and television station managers requesting a cease-fire. Brown, who is up for re-election to a full term, said that third-party ads “spend millions of dollars from anonymous donors portraying their opposition unfairly and misleading voters.” The question now is whether the agreement is enforceable.
4, In Montana, the State Supreme Court upheld by a 5-2 vote a law banning corporations from making political expenditures. A New York Times editorial praised the Montana Supreme Court, stating that “in Citizens United, the conservative majority turned itself into a copper kings’ court.” The majority rejected Justice Kennedy’s “misguided reasoning” that money does not “give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption.” The court’s dissenters, however, argued that the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision dictates the opposite result, and warned that the Supreme Court would not allow Montana to ignore precedent.
Tags: Democracy, Campaign Finance Reform, Public Financing, NY Reform
By John Travis – 01/25/12
Crossposted at ReformNY.
In a joint op-ed in today’s Times-Union, former New York State Congressmen Sherwood Boehlert and Scott Murphy voiced their support for Governor Cuomo’s plan to enact a system of public financing of elections, an issue he gave prominence in his State of the State address.
Speaking from their experiences as former members of Congress representing both major political parties, Boehlert and Murphy acknowledge the “corrosive role that private money plays in political campaigns and the legislative process,” both in Washington and Albany. The increased cost of running for office in New York means that candidates have to spend more and more time courting special interests to raise money for their campaigns. This has only contributed to Albany’s culture of dependence on big money.
The solution for our state: adopt a system of voluntary public financing of elections with matching funds like we have in New York City. If small donor contributions are matched on a 4-to-1 ratio, politicians would be able to spend less time raising money from lobbyists and special interests, and more time focusing on serving the interests of their constituents.
A recent Siena poll indicates that public financing of elections has broad support among both Republicans and Democrats in New York. Boehlert and Murphy have now added to the growing — and bipartisan — chorus of calls for meaningful campaign finance reform in Albany.
Tags: Democracy, Campaign Finance Reform, Public Financing, NY Reform
By John Travis – 01/20/12
Crossposted at ReformNY.
New York’s notoriously weak campaign finance laws were highlighted this week as disclosure reports revealed that former Assemblyman Carl Kruger used nearly $1.4 million from his campaign funds to pay for his legal defense against federal corruption charges. While other states require that candidates set up a legal defense fund, New York allow candidates to use cash from campaign funds pay attorney’s fees.
Susan Lerner from Common Cause/NY notes that “when contributors give to a candidate, they want to support the candidate in his election campaign — not pay for his defense against fraud charges.”
Our former colleague, Ciara Torres-Spelliscy, has pointed out that lawmakers have taken advantage New York's laws by using campaign funds to pay for cars, cell phones, country clubs, sporting events tickets, legal bills, meals and even pet food.
Senator Liz Krueger introduced a bill last year that would address the misuse of campaign funds for personal purposes. Among other restrictions, S3053 would forbid the use campaign funds to “pay attorney’s fees or any costs of defending against any civil or criminal investigation or prosecution for alleged violations of state or federal law.”
Of course, this incident highlights only one of the many problems with our state’s campaign finance laws and we hope that it will be among those addressed when the promised campaign finance bill is introduced.
Tags: Democracy, NY Reform
By John Travis – 01/05/12
Crossposted at ReformNY.
During his State of the State address, Governor Andrew Cuomo reaffirmed his commitment to clean up Albany, telling legislators he would send them a campaign finance reform bill that would include voluntary public financing of elections. The system would be modeled on New York City’s successful matching funds system which has increased the competitiveness of elections, diversity among candidates, and the participation of small donors.
In his written message, the governor called for additional campaign finance reforms, including lowering the state’s sky-high contribution limits, enacting pay-to-play rules, and improving the enforcement of campaign finance laws by creating a new enforcement unit at the Board of Elections. Given the recent corruption scandals involving elected officials and those seeking to do business with the state, this is a positive reform for New Yorkers that would reduce the dependence on money from special interests and help restore trust in state government.
The Brennan Center’s Michael Waldman appeared on NY1 and Capital Tonight to discuss the governor’s speech. "This exciting and vital proposal would make New York a national example of how to revitalize our democracy," Waldman said. "Meaningful campaign reform would curb corruption and boost accountability. It is the single most important next step to transform Albany. We welcome the Governor’s leadership on this issue and are looking forward to helping him make these reforms a reality."
Tags: Democracy, Campaign Finance Reform, Public Financing, NY Reform
By Kelly Williams – 12/09/11
Crossposted at ReformNY.
When New York State’s new ethics law was announced in June of 2011, editorial boards and citizens responded in typical New York fashion — some with praise, others with the proverbial “Bronx cheer.” The law is both a product of many political compromises and, at the same time, a vast improvement over the ineffective self-policing system of legislative ethics enforcement that existed before, so timely and orderly implementation of the new joint commission on public ethics will send an important message to New Yorkers.
The law requires that the new ethics watchdog be fully operational on December 12, just 120 days after enactment. This means that by next week, 14 new commissioners must have been appointed by legislative leaders and the executive branch, who in turn will have hired an executive director approved by a bipartisan majority of the new commission. The law requires that the new commission also approve a staffing plan for the day-to-day work, adopt rules and regulations to govern its procedures, make forms available, review financial disclosure statements, continue investigations that were suspended earlier this year and begin receiving and investigating complaints and referrals.
It is an ambitious mandate and we hope legislative leadership and the executive will ensure the new commission has everything it needs to roll up its sleeves and get to work.
From the archives:
We thought it worthwhile to reprint our reasons for supporting the new joint commission on public ethics:
- For the first time ever, we will have an ethics overseer that includes both gubernatorial and legislative appointees, and excludes the persons being policed.
- New commissioners will serve fixed five-year terms, and may only be removed for cause: we hope that this degree of independence, coupled with a broader mandate and penalties for leaks about proceedings, will enable people to have thoughtful deliberations and vote their conscious.
- Officials will be required to provide unredacted financial information including sources and amounts of income, including the identity of clients for whom they perform state business, even clients of a law practice. And this information will be available, in its entirety, to the public.
- A new database will identify all firms representing everyone with state business, and since officials must disclose their business partners on their financial disclosure forms, the public will be able to also evaluate these relationships.
- Lobbyists now will be required to disclose their business relationships, if any, with public officials.
- A review commission will look at the efficacy of this in 2015, after it has been up and running.
Criticism has been aimed at the make up of the commission: the legislative leaders appoint 8 of 14 commissioners and the Governor appoints the other six. Appointments are party based and will exclude minority parties. In order for an investigation to proceed, the votes of two of the target’s appointees are required in some circumstances. There is a danger that such a large commission will be unwieldy and that the provisions requiring affirmative votes could be exercised like vetoes, as per the commissioner’s appointer, not her conscious.
Tags: Democracy, NY Reform
By ReformNY – 12/09/11
Crossposted at ReformNY.
Every Friday, the Brennan Center will be compiling the latest news concerning the corrosive nature of money in New York State politics — and the ongoing need for public financing and robust campaign finance reform. We’ll also be linking to dispatches from around the country highlighting the national scope of this crisis. This week’s links were contributed by Matthew Ladd.
For more stories on an ongoing basis, follow the Twitter hashtag #moNeYpolitics
NY Campaign Finance
1. Joan Mandle’s Sunday Op-Ed in the Syracuse Post-Standard issued a clarion call for voluntary public financing of elections in New York state. Drawing on recent visits to New York college campuses, Mandle observed that frustration with the political system is a direct result of the massive influx of corporate money in legislative campaigns, and encouraged Gov. Cuomo to return to his earlier outspoken support for a voluntary public financing system. “We believe in democracy,” Mandle wrote. “It’s time for our elected officials to prove that they do, too.”
2. The Times-Union also called for Gov. Cuomo to move forward with his campaign promise to prioritize public financing, pointing out that independent expenditure loopholes allowed a coalition of labor unions to pour $400,000 into the coffers of a challenger for Erie County executive during the final six weeks of the race. A state public funding remedy would guarantee that even “a candidate being overwhelmed by special-interest money... would be assured of funds by way of a constituency without a clear agenda.”
3. Trustees at Manhattan’s Intrepid Sea, Air and Space Museum encouraged other board members to contribute to Gov. Cuomo’s re-election campaign by attending a birthday fundraiser at the Intrepid, raising questions about when directors of a nonprofit organization may engage in political activity without risking their tax-exempt status. Although the email was sent from a trustee’s museum email address, a museum spokesman characterized the email as a “personal appeal,” implying that the sender — a co-chair of the Intrepid’s charitable foundation — did not send it in his capacity as trustee.
NY Corruption and Politics
4. William Boyland’s bribery scandal continues to make headlines, as his chief of staff, Ry-Ann Hermon, was charged this week with taking bribes from the same federal officers who recorded Boyland’s bribery solicitations. The arrest comes on the heels of Boyland’s latest charges, which include evidence that he took a $3,800 bribe from a federal agent at a Brooklyn fundraiser while claiming travel and lodging expenses as if he were in Albany on state business. The ongoing scandal has moved Republican State Sen. Steve McLaughlin to call for Boyland’s resignation.
5. Four associates of Queens State Sen. Shirley Huntley, including one of her aides, have been charged with misappropriating $30,000 in public funds that was earmarked for Parent Workshop, a nonprofit ostensibly created to help parents navigate the New York City school system. The indictments are the latest — and most high-profile — results of this year’s joint effort between attorney general Eric Schneiderman and city comptroller Thomas DiNapoli to target public corruption. Subpoenas, including one for Huntley’s daughter, were issued in March, but the state did not file charges until this week.
Campaign Finance and Politics Nationwide
6. The world’s largest ethanol producer is also a major contributor to New Gingrich’s presidential campaign, according to a study released by the Center for Responsive Politics. Individual donors from the corporation include CEO Jeff Broin, who also chairs Growth Energy, an ethanol lobbying organization that hired Gingrich as a consultant two years ago.
Tags: Democracy, Campaign Finance Reform, NY Reform
By John Travis – 12/07/11
Cross-posted at Reform NY.
The Brennan Center released a report this week detailing the tens of thousands of votes that were lost in New York because voting machines read their choices as “overvotes” – the invalid selections of more than the allowable number of candidates. Instead of returning the ballot, as is done in many other jurisdictions, the ballots were retained and the machine displayed a screen message using complex election jargon that gave voters misleading cues about their options. In the 2010 election, this confusing message led to as many as 20,000 lost votes in the governor’s contest alone and as many as 60,000 lost votes across all contests. The New York Times, Daily News, WNYC, and Politico have all done a great job covering the story.
The Brennan Center and others warned state election officialsabout the potential problems that would arise due to this confusing message. Represented by the Brennan Center, the NAACP New York State Conference, the National Coalition on Black Civic Participation, Families United for Racial and Economic Equality, and several individual plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against the New York State and New York City Boards of Elections in June of 2010 over the discriminatory impact on minority voters.
Our new study confirms that people of color were disproportionately likely to lose their vote. One percent of black and Hispanic voters in New York City did not have their votes for governor counted. In two predominantly Hispanic election districts in the South Bronx, nearly 40% of all votes were not counted in 2010; despite our repeated requests for an investigation into the overvotes in the South Bronx, we are not aware that one has been conducted. Our report also details problems with ballot design, finding that voters were more likely to cast an overvote in a race where candidates for the same office were displayed across two rows of the ballot (such as in the governor’s contest and in Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand’s U.S. Senate contest).We estimate that if no revisions are made to the overvote message, over 100,000 votes in New York could be lost in the 2012 election, when turnout will be much higher.
Fortunately, as detailed in the report, the State Board of Elections has agreed to adopt a better overvote warning in time for the 2012 election. But more steps can and should be taken to prevent lost votes. Election officials should make election results available by precinct; those results should report the number of overvotes in each contest on the ballot. When problems are discovered, election officials should be empowered required to investigate the reasons for high overvote rates. Ballots should be treated as public records to allow members of the public and voting experts to determine if ballots were in fact overvoted or simply recorded as overvotes because of a machine error. And states should reexamine their ballot design requirements and provide election administration officials with the guidance and flexibility they need to create voter-friendly ballots.
The recommendations are not specific to New York and can serve as models for jurisdictions across the nation to ensure that votes are counted as they were intended to be cast. The new report is available through the Brennan Center’s website.
Tags: Democracy, NY Reform, Voting Rights & Elections, Ballot & Election Material Design, Voting Technology
Page 1 of 15 pages 1 2 3 > Last »
Permalink