Press Releases
Share ThisApr 23, 2008
DCCC Files 2nd FEC Complaint Against Freedom’s Watch
The DCCC filed a complaint today with the Federal
Election Commission (FEC) against Freedom’s Watch, a shadowy outside group, for
running a political attack ad that directly and illegally advocates the defeat
of a Democratic candidate and also for failing to disclose the names of the
donors funding that ad.
This is the second complaint the DCCC has filed with the
FEC on the political attack ads that Freedom’s Watch is running in the LA-06
special election against Democratic candidate Don Cazayoux. The first
complaint was on Freedom’s Watch and the NRCC’s illegal coordination of their
attack ads.
“The DCCC is filing this FEC complaint to hold Freedom’s
Watch accountable for their illegal election ads that are being used to mislead
voters in LA-06,” said Brian Wolff, Executive Director of the DCCC. “Clearly,
Freedom’s Watch knows their ads cross the line or they wouldn’t have had to hide
their donors’ names. Tom Cole’s wish for Freedom’s Watch help is quickly
becoming the NRCC’s worst nightmare.”
Freedom’s Watch is operating as the cash-strapped NRCC’s
de facto independent expenditure campaign.
Thomasenia Duncan,
Esq.
General
Counsel
Federal Election
Commission
999 E Street,
N.W.
Re: Complaint against Freedom’s
Watch, Inc.
Dear Ms.
Duncan,
I write this letter
to file a complaint pursuant to 2 U.S.C. § 437g(a)(1) against Freedom’s Watch,
Inc. The facts indicate that Freedom’s Watch, Inc. is operating in complete
violation of federal campaign finance laws – it has spent funds illegally on ads
that have no reasonable interpretation other than as an appeal to vote against a
clearly identified Federal candidate, and it has failed to disclose any of its
donors. The Commission should immediately investigate these
violations.
THE FACTS
On April 13, 2008, Freedom’s Watch, Inc.
began to air a television advertisement that expressly advocates the defeat of
congressional candidate Don Cazayoux on selected stations in the state of
The full script of the television
advertisement is attached at Exhibit A.
On April 16, 2008, Freedom’s Watch, Inc.
filed FEC Form 9, “24 Hour Notice of Disbursements/Obligations for
Electioneering Communications”, for disbursements made in connection to a
television advertisement entitled “Family Taxes.” The report indicates that
Freedom’s Watch, Inc. is a “corporation, labor organization, or qualified
nonprofit corporation making contributions under 11 C.F.R. 114.15.” Schedule
9-B of the report lists two expenditures totaling $125,966.80 for media
placement and media production. Schedule 9-A of the report is blank – the
report fails to identify any person who made a donation aggregating $1,000 or
more for the purpose of furthering electioneering communications.
On information and belief, individual
donors to Freedom’s Watch, Inc. have the authority to approve or reject projects
and communications that are sponsored by the organization. See, e.g., Michael Luo, Great Expectations for a Conservative Group See All
but Dashed, N.Y. Times, April 12, 2008. Once projects and
communications have been approved, individual donations are then made for the
specific purpose of financing the approved projects and communications.
See id. Accordingly, if
Freedom’s Watch, Inc. paid for electioneering communications, then they must
have received contributions for the purpose of furthering them. However,
Freedom’s Watch, Inc. did not disclose a single contribution made for such
purpose on its April 16 report. One can only surmise that Freedom's Watch had a
special interest in obscuring its donors that relates to this particular race,
in this particular district.
ARGUMENT
A. Freedom’s
Watch, Inc. Made Prohibited Disbursements for Electioneering
Communication
A corporation may
make an electioneering communication beyond its restricted class only if it can
be reasonably interpreted as something other than an appeal to vote for or
against a clearly identified Federal candidate. See 11 C.F.R. § 114.15(a). In order to
fall within the Commission’s safe harbor guidelines, the electioneering
communication must not “take a position on any candidate’s or officeholder’s
character, qualifications, or fitness for office.” 11 C.F.R. § 114.15(b)(2).
Any corporate disbursement for an electioneering communication that is not
permissible under 11 C.F.R. § 114.15 is prohibited. See 11 C.F.R. §
114.14(a)(1).
By stating that
State Representative Cazayoux’s votes in the state legislature in favor of
higher taxes have cost voters “too much”, the television advertisement takes a
clear position on his qualifications and fitness for public office. Airing just
three weeks before an election, it cannot be reasonably interpreted as anything
other than an appeal to vote against Don Cazayoux. Accordingly, the
electioneering communication is not
permissible under 11 C.F.R. § 114.15, and therefore any corporate
expenditure for such communication is prohibited.
Freedom’s Watch,
Inc. also violated federal campaign finance laws by failing to disclose the name
and address of each donor who gave $1,000 or more to the organization. The
Commission’s regulations require that every person who has made an
electioneering communication in excess of $10,000 meet certain reporting
requirements. One such requirement is the disclosure of all donors that made
contributions in excess of $1,000 since the first day of the preceding calendar
year. See 11 C.F.R. §
104.20(c)(8). In a clear violation of federal law, Freedom’s Watch, Inc. failed
to disclose any of its donors on its April 16 report. (Freedom's Watch purports
to be a section 501(c)(4) organization, thus putting all of its donors outside
public view. The group seems to be manipulating FEC and IRS rules to avoid
disclosing its donors entirely.)
B. Freedom’s
Watch, Inc. Failed to Disclose Donations Made for Purpose of Furthering
Electioneering Communications
Even if the
electioneering communication were permissible under 11 C.F.R. § 114.15, a
corporation that makes permissible disbursements for electioneering
communications must still disclose the name and address of each person who made
a donation aggregating $1,000 or more to the corporation for the purpose of
furthering electioneering communications. See 11 C.F.R. § 104.20(c)(9). According
to its April 16 report, Freedom’s Watch, Inc. is a corporation that has made
disbursements for electioneering communications pursuant to 11 C.F.R. § 114.15.
Having made such disbursements, it is therefore required to disclose the name
and address of any donor to the corporation that has made contributions
aggregating $1,000 or more for the purpose of furthering electioneering
communications. The Commission’s regulations require the corporation to
disclose all such donations made on or after January 1, 2007. By failing to
report any contributions made to
the corporation for the purpose of furthering electioneering communications,
Freedom’s Watch Inc. has acted in contravention of federal campaign finance
laws.
For all of these
reasons, we demand that the Commission investigate immediately the violations
presented herein. We request that Freedom’s Watch, Inc. be enjoined from
further violations, and be fined the maximum amount permitted by
law.
/s/
Brian Wolff
Executive
Director
Democratic Congressional Campaign
Committee
