MoveOn.org and McCain-Feingold
Mar. 10th, 2004 10:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
avramThe other day, ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
solarbird linked to a news article about the Republican National Committee warning TV stations not to run ads from MoveOn.org. The RNC claims that the ads are financed in violation of the recent McCain/Feingold amendment to the tax code, which (they say) was intended to prevent unlimited soft money from being spent on campaign ads.
Here‘s what John McCain said about the proposed McCain-Feingold bill back in 2000, emphasis added by me:
I found the full text of McCain-Feingold, but frankly, it made my eyes glaze over. I also found a summary, which says that the amendment prohibits “the national political parties, and federal candidates and officials, from raising, spending or directing soft money” and “the state parties from spending soft money for activities which affect federal elections”, neither of which should affect MoveOn.org.
This isn’t the first time the right wing has belched slime on MoveOn.org. A few months back, Matt Drudge made a stink over the fact (which had not been concealed) that MoveOn.org accepts foreign donations. Drudge implied that this was in some way improper or scandalous. In fact, as can be verified by a glance at the bottom of MoveOn’s donations page, MoveOn is a family of three organizations: MoveOn.org (an education and advocacy group, allowed to take foreign money), the MoveOn.org PAC, and the MoveOn.org Voter Fund. It’s the last that finances the anti-Bush ads, and it’s never taken foreign money.
Update: Also see this entry in the Election Law weblog. And this Washington Post story about an earlier FEC ruling. This might be more complicated than I’d thought. Oh, and here’s a summary of Senate Rules and Administration Committee’s recent hearing on Section 527 Organizations. Phew!
solarbird linked to a news article about the Republican National Committee warning TV stations not to run ads from MoveOn.org. The RNC claims that the ads are financed in violation of the recent McCain/Feingold amendment to the tax code, which (they say) was intended to prevent unlimited soft money from being spent on campaign ads. Here‘s what John McCain said about the proposed McCain-Feingold bill back in 2000, emphasis added by me:
Mr. President, this amendment would mandate that the names of contributors to entities operating under Section 527 of the tax code be disclosed. This amendment is simple. It is straightforward. It would impose no substantial burdens on any entity. And most importantly, it is constitutional and in no way infringes on the free speech of any individual or group. [...]
Our amendment would, however, require 527 organizations to disclose their existence to the IRS, to file publicly available tax returns and to file with the IRS and make public reports specifying annual expenditures of over $500 and identifying those who contribute more than $200 annually to the organization.
I found the full text of McCain-Feingold, but frankly, it made my eyes glaze over. I also found a summary, which says that the amendment prohibits “the national political parties, and federal candidates and officials, from raising, spending or directing soft money” and “the state parties from spending soft money for activities which affect federal elections”, neither of which should affect MoveOn.org.
This isn’t the first time the right wing has belched slime on MoveOn.org. A few months back, Matt Drudge made a stink over the fact (which had not been concealed) that MoveOn.org accepts foreign donations. Drudge implied that this was in some way improper or scandalous. In fact, as can be verified by a glance at the bottom of MoveOn’s donations page, MoveOn is a family of three organizations: MoveOn.org (an education and advocacy group, allowed to take foreign money), the MoveOn.org PAC, and the MoveOn.org Voter Fund. It’s the last that finances the anti-Bush ads, and it’s never taken foreign money.
Update: Also see this entry in the Election Law weblog. And this Washington Post story about an earlier FEC ruling. This might be more complicated than I’d thought. Oh, and here’s a summary of Senate Rules and Administration Committee’s recent hearing on Section 527 Organizations. Phew!