Democrats Challenge GOP’s “Super-Duper PAC”

Flickr/Beverly & Pack

For indispensable reporting on the coronavirus crisis, the election, and more, subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily newsletter.

A pair of Democratic strategists have challenged right-wing lawyer James Bopp and his new scheme to use members of Congress to drum up unlimited cash for what you might call the GOP’s new “super-duper” PAC.

In a letter to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) sent today, Monica Dixon and Ali Lapp, the directors of two new super PACs intended to bolster congressional Democrats in 2012, have questioned the legality of Bopp’s new venture, simply called “Republican Super PAC.” While federal law caps campaign donations directly to candidates at $2,500 a year, Bopp’s plan would harness the fundraising prowess of politicians to funnel donations to Bopp’s outfit—the donors could even tell Republican Super PAC to earmark their money for particular race. The key, Bopp told my colleague Stephanie Mencimer, is that “coordination only applies to spending, not to the fundraising.” What Bopp’s saying is that while PACs like his cannot directly coordinate with candidates or elected officials on TV ads, mailers, or other types of campaigning, it’s perfectly legal to ask candidates to raise money for his PAC.

Dixon and Lapp, however, want the FEC to take a look at Bopp’s strategy and declare if it’s legal or not. Pointing to federal statute, their attorneys say that Bopp’s plan “would appear to prohibit [federal elected officials, candidates for federal office, and national party committee members] from soliciting unlimited individual, corporate, and union contributions on behalf of” PACs like Bopp’s. In an accompanying statement Dixon and Lapp said: “We are seeking immediate clarification from the FEC in order to ensure that our organizations operate fully within the law and in order to assure operational equivalency between Republicans and Democrats.”

Which is to say, if the FEC approves of what the other guys are doing with their super-duper PAC, we should be able to do it as well.

Here’s the full letter:

Advisory Opinion Request – IE PAC Solicitations

More MotherJones reporting on Dark Money

DOES IT FEEL LIKE POLITICS IS AT A BREAKING POINT?

Headshot of Editor in Chief of Mother Jones, Clara Jeffery

It sure feels that way to me, and here at Mother Jones, we’ve been thinking a lot about what journalism needs to do differently, and how we can have the biggest impact.

We kept coming back to one word: corruption. Democracy and the rule of law being undermined by those with wealth and power for their own gain. So we're launching an ambitious Mother Jones Corruption Project to do deep, time-intensive reporting on systemic corruption, and asking the MoJo community to help crowdfund it.

We aim to hire, build a team, and give them the time and space needed to understand how we got here and how we might get out. We want to dig into the forces and decisions that have allowed massive conflicts of interest, influence peddling, and win-at-all-costs politics to flourish.

It's unlike anything we've done, and we have seed funding to get started, but we're looking to raise $500,000 from readers by July when we'll be making key budgeting decisions—and the more resources we have by then, the deeper we can dig. If our plan sounds good to you, please help kickstart it with a tax-deductible donation today.

Thanks for reading—whether or not you can pitch in today, or ever, I'm glad you're with us.

Signed by Clara Jeffery

Clara Jeffery, Editor-in-Chief

We Recommend

Latest