Democrats Challenge GOP’s “Super-Duper PAC”

Flickr/Beverly & Pack

Get your news from a source that’s not owned and controlled by oligarchs. Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily.

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

PLEASE—BEFORE YOU CLICK AWAY!

“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things it doesn’t like—which is most things that are true.

We’ll say it loud and clear: At Mother Jones, no one gets to tell us what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. The deadline’s almost here. Please help us reach our $150k membership goal by May 31.

payment methods

PLEASE—BEFORE YOU CLICK AWAY!

“Lying.” “Disgusting.” “Scum.” “Slime.” “Corrupt.” “Enemy of the people.” Donald Trump has always made clear what he thinks of journalists. And it’s plain now that his administration intends to do everything it can to stop journalists from reporting things it doesn’t like—which is most things that are true.

We’ll say it loud and clear: At Mother Jones, no one gets to tell us what to publish or not publish, because no one owns our fiercely independent newsroom. But that also means we need to directly raise the resources it takes to keep our journalism alive. There’s only one way for that to happen, and it’s readers like you stepping up. The deadline’s almost here. Please help us reach our $150k membership goal by May 31.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate