WASHINGTON, D.C. - Today, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed an amicus brief in Federal Election Commission v. Ted Cruz for Senate to defend a law that prevents potential corruption from arising when politicians make personal loans to their own campaigns only to repay them with donations received after Election Day.

Federal law limits candidates from using more than $250,000 in contributions raised after the date of an election to repay outstanding personal loans made to their campaign. In 2018, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-T.X.) put $260,000 of his own money into his reelection and sued the Federal Election Commission (FEC) the following year, complaining that this law prevented him from paying off the last $10,000 with post-election contributions. In June, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia sided with Sen. Cruz, striking down the limit on the amount candidates can raise post-election to repay personal loans to their campaigns.

What should concern all voters is that the funds raised for such a purpose are not the typical campaign contributions made to a candidate to support an active campaign; instead, they are solicited after the election has occurred for the sole purpose of repaying the candidate’s personal campaign loans—and thus the money effectively goes right into that candidate’s pocket.

The risk of corruption posed by what is functionally a personal “gift” to a candidate is high—a donor, possibly one voters may disapprove of, or one with business before a committee that candidate sits on, is essentially giving that candidate a personal check.

“This time, the FEC got it right,” said Paul Smith, vice president for litigation & strategy at CLC. “They are appealing to defend a law which has the clear purpose of preventing corruption. In these types of post-election loan repayments, you can trace a direct line from the donor to a candidate’s personal bank account.”

Voters have a right to know which wealthy special interests are writing checks to their elected officials, a knowledge that becomes useless if that check is written after Election Day. It should be no surprise that Americans overwhelmingly express concern over the potentially corruptive nature of post-election campaign contributions.   

At Campaign Legal Center, we are advancing democracy through law. Learn more about our work.

Under the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act, members of Congress must disclose a stock trade within 45 days of the trade with no exceptions

Washington D.C. – Today, Campaign Legal Center (CLC) filed complaints with congressional ethics offices against three freshman members of Congress—Sen. Tommy Tuberville (R-AL), Rep. Pat Fallon (R-TX) and Rep. Blake Moore (R-UT)—for failure to comply with the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge (STOCK) Act.

Despite all members and their staff receiving mandatory STOCK Act training, all three members failed to disclose their stock trades at the time of the transactions. They claim that they were unaware of the transactions, which is not an exception under the law.

• Sen. Tuberville failed to properly disclose nearly 130 separate stock and stock-option trades together worth at least $894,000 and as much as $3.5 million. The complaint against Sen. Tuberville was filed with the Senate Ethics Committee. 
• Rep. Fallon failed to properly disclose 93 stock trades together worth at least $7.8 million and as much as $17.53 million. The complaint against Rep. Fallon was filed with the Office of Congressional Ethics.
• Rep. Moore failed to properly disclose 70 separate stock and stock-option trades together worth at least $70,000 and as much as $1.1 million. The complaint against Rep. Moore was filed with the Office of Congressional Ethics. 

The actions of these three members follow a troubling, bipartisan trend. Recent examples of other members of Congress failing to disclose stock trades include Rep. Tom Malinowski (D-NJ), who CLC filed a complaint against earlier this year, and former Rep. Donna Shalala (D-FL). This ongoing trend of STOCK Act violations shows that merely the threat of a fine is not deterring members of Congress from breaking the law.

If members are not held accountable for failing to disclose stock trades promptly, many may simply wait until their annual financial disclosures to reveal stock trades and pay nominal late fees, thereby circumventing the STOCK Act. Such a delay allows these members to avoid real accountability.

“The purpose of the STOCK Act is to give voters real time transparency of the financial interests of their elected officials that may conflict with their official duties,” said Kedric Payne, general counsel and senior director of ethics at Campaign Legal Center. “Members of Congress will continue to file late reports and defeat the purpose of the law without meaningful ethics enforcement.”

When elected officials prioritize their own financial self-interest, they are not only hurting their own accountability, but they are diminishing public trust in government. As members of Congress craft laws that directly impact the lives of all Americans, the public must be able to trust that representatives are acting in the public’s interest, and not in their own financial interest. 

At Campaign Legal Center, we are advancing democracy through law. Learn more about our work.