WASHINGTON – Today, the Federal Election Commission (FEC) announced that the agency will begin reviewing campaign disclosure reports to determine whether former candidates and officeholders are illegally using leftover campaign money for personal purposes, after Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a petition for rulemaking on Feb. 5, 2018. A bombshell investigation by the Tampa Bay Times and WTSP revealed how common it is for former officeholders to continue using campaign funds long after candidates left office, stopped campaigning, or died, on expenses like country club dues, expensive flights and hotels, and cell phone bills.

“We applaud the FEC for taking action to crack down on the ‘zombie campaign’ phenomenon,” said Adav Noti, senior director, trial litigation at CLC and former associate general counsel for policy at the FEC. “It is not in the public interest for campaign accounts to turn into personal slush funds for former candidates. While enforcing the existing rules on the use of campaign funds is a big step in the right direction, the FEC will also need to clarify and strengthen those rules to properly address this widespread problem.”

Today’s announcement from the FEC commits the FEC to ensuring that campaign funds are only used to support one’s candidacy and duties as an officeholder. That means that once a person is no longer a candidate or officeholder, the allowable uses of campaign funds become more limited.

CLC has brought this issue to the attention of the FEC with the rulemaking petition as well as two legal complaints in the past year pointing to egregious examples of former lawmakers or their campaign staff converting funds to personal use.

• October 2017: Retired Congressman Cliff Stearns still has an active campaign account despite leaving office in 2013. CLC filed a complaint because Stearns was using apparently illegal campaign expenditures to pay for his monthly cellphone bill, payments to his wife, membership dues at private Washington D.C. clubs, and expenses apparently related to his private sector lobbying career.
• January 2018: CLC filed a complaint concerning the treasurer of the late-Congressman Mark Takai’s campaign committee, who paid himself more than $100,000 after Takai’s passing to “consult” the campaign.
• February 2018: CLC files a rulemaking petition asking the FEC to revise and amend regulations pertaining to the personal use of campaign funds as they apply to former candidates and officeholders.
• March 2018: the FEC published a notice of availability in the Federal Register regarding CLC’s rulemaking petition.

Research recommends solutions like Honest Ads Act, which would extend disclosure requirements to all major ad platforms, helping root out foreign interference

WASHINGTON – Today, CLC and Issue One, in conjunction with University of Wisconsin-Madison Professor Young Mie Kim and her team, Project DATA (Digital Ad Tracking & Analysis), published the results of a first-of-its-kind, peer-reviewed research of Facebook political ads in the 2016 elections. The study by Professor Kim and her team provides compelling support for the Honest Ads Act, bipartisan legislation that has been endorsed by tech companies including Facebook and Twitter that would help root out foreign interference in U.S. elections and make digital advertisers more accountable.

Professor Kim and her team captured and analyzed five million paid ads on Facebook in the weeks ahead of the 2016 elections, and their peer-reviewed study is forthcoming in the journal Political Communication. This research is the first, large-scale, systematic empirical analysis that investigates Facebook political advertising.

Of the 228 groups that purchased political ads about hot-button political issues in the weeks before the 2016 elections, 121 were identified by Professor Kim and her team as “suspicious” — which means that there was no publicly available information about nearly half of the sponsors of Facebook ads featuring hot-button political issues in the weeks before the 2016 elections. In this research, suspicious groups are unidentifiable, untrackable groups that have no public footprints. Professor Kim and her team identified a group as suspicious if no information about the group was found elsewhere, even after her team reviewed the Federal Election Commission, IRS-based databases, and other research databases.

A quarter of the ads the research examined mentioned candidates, and would be subject to disclosure requirements if aired on TV, but escaped those transparency measures because they were run online.

This secrecy would not be possible on broadcast. While social media companies have proposed new transparency measures, the Honest Ads Act would solidify disclosure requirements by moving the law into the 21st century. The bipartisan legislation aims to ensure that digital political ads are subject to the same transparency requirements that apply to similar ads run on any other medium. The bill would shine a spotlight on some of the digital advertising practices outlined in the Project DATA study by creating a public footprint. 

“As this peer-reviewed study demonstrates, secretive groups were able to run tens of thousands of digital political ads without detection because of massive loopholes in our campaign finance laws,” said Brendan Fischer, director, federal reform program at CLC. “This study demonstrates the importance of Congress addressing campaign finance law’s internet blind spot. The protection of American elections from foreign interference cannot be left to voluntary measures by tech companies.”

One-sixth of the “suspicious” advertisers turned out to be Kremlin-linked Russian groups, according to Project DATA’s analysis of information released by the House Intelligence Committee. Additionally, the peer-reviewed study found that voters in swing states like Wisconsin and Pennsylvania were disproportionately targeted with ads featuring divisive issues like guns, immigration, and race relations. These included ads that raised anger or fear, or emphasized the divides between subgroups of the population. Some of these ads were sponsored by nonprofits that did not file a disclosure report to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) about the source of their funding.

"We have seen clear evidence that when left unchecked, foreign actors seeking to affect U.S. politics will use — and abuse — any tool at their disposal. It is time for digital platforms to be held to the same common-sense, simple rules that govern disclosure of television and radio ads," said Issue One Executive Director Meredith McGehee. "The 21st century realities of online political advertising have overwhelmed our country's capacity to hold rule-breakers accountable. The Honest Ads Act would begin to fix this problem." 

The Honest Ads Act was endorsed last week by Facebook and Twitter, but has yet to receive a hearing.

Read a press-friendly repackaged report of the research.

* The underlying study initially identified 122 “suspicious” groups. One group was erroneously placed in this category. The correct number is 121.   ​

Today, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed a lawsuit in D.C. District Court against the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement Agency (ICE) for failing to disclose their operating agreements with a private prison in Washington State. GEO Corrections Holdings Inc., one of the largest private prisons in the country, has a role in operating the facility, but the extent of that role is unclear. CLC submitted its Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request to ICE on December 8, 2017, but it has produced no documents. ICE was legally required to respond within 20 days.

GEO was a major donor to the presidential campaign of Donald Trump, contributing a total of $225,000 in 2016 to the super PAC Rebuilding America Now. The first contribution came one day after the Obama Administration announced its decision to phase out the use of private prisons, a decision that was immediately reversed after Jeff Sessions became Attorney General in February 2017. CLC has a campaign finance complaint pending before the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleging that GEO’s contributions to Rebuilding America Now violated the ban on federal contractors making political contributions.

“Public officials are supposed to make contracting decisions based on what is best for the public, not based on who spent the most money getting them elected,” said Mark Gaber, senior legal counsel at CLC. “The public has a right to know where their tax dollars are being spent on federal contracts, so ICE should not try to hide their operating agreements from public view. If GEO has a role in operating the facility in Washington, this is further evidence that their contributions in 2016 were illegal. We expect the District Court to compel ICE to be transparent – and produce documents that shed light on this relationship.”