FEC Fires First Shot at 527s, and Picks The Club for Growth

While I strongly support the positions of The Club for Growth (CFG) on fiscal matters, I have questioned some of its campaign tactics (third item at linked post), particularly during the Second Congressional District primary here in Ohio in June.

That said, I’ve never suggested that they should be silenced, or even regulated.

But now The Federal Election Commission has finally dropped the big one free-speech advocates have been worrying about, and picked CFG as its first target:

Federal election officials on Monday sued a political group to try to force it to comply with campaign finance limits, the first lawsuit of its kind to arise from controversial big-money fundraising during the 2004 elections.

The Federal Election Commission filed a complaint in U.S. District Court in Washington against the Club for Growth. The pro-Republican group (note the blatant mischaracterization by AP–Ed.) spent at least $21 million in the 2003-04 election cycle. (Note: Figure is just over $11 million at OpenSecrets.org; HT Jack Lewis–Ed.)

The FEC contends the Club spent enough in federal races to require it to file with the commission as a political committee and abide by contribution and spending limits. It wants the court to fine the group and to order it to comply with campaign finance rules.

The FEC press release is here.

CFG’s public response states, in part:

We have consulted with counsel every step of the way and have followed the law and regulations that govern our work.

This action by the commission was triggered by a Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee complaint about ads we ran criticizing former Sen. Tom Daschle’s refusal to back pro-growth tax cuts. The complaint had no supporting detail and the Commission allowed it to lie inactive for nearly a year and one half and then resurrected it as a platform to seek to take away our members’ rights and exact a huge civil penalty from the Club.

The Club will vigorously defend the rights of our members, and all Americans, to organize and speak out about our government’s policies. The FEC’s outrageous lawsuit will further boost our members’ determination to work harder than ever before for free speech and free markets.

I find the FEC’s test case of choice interesting, considering the much larger amounts of money spent by other 527s. Never mind the liberal or conservative tags–CFG doesn’t have the open-ended backing of big-big money types like George Soros or Peter Lewis, and has spent relatively little compared to the cumulative totals of America Coming Together, MoveOn.org, and organized labor. (italicized words added at 11AM on Sept. 20 for accuracy)

It couldn’t be that CFG was a player in the 2004 defeat of Senator Tom Daschle in South Dakota, could it? Well, yes:

The FEC investigated Club for Growth fundraising and spending after the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee complained to the commission about it.

The DSCC complaint stemmed from an ad the Club ran in the 2003-04 election cycle against then-Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., over his opposition to a tax-cut proposal. Daschle lost to a Republican in last November’s election.

What part of “Congress shall make no law” does the FEC, John McCain, Russ Feingold, both houses of Congress, the media, the President (he signed “Campaign Finance Reform,” remember?), and the Supreme Court (which should have laughed it off the docket) not understand?

Congress should end its fantasy of “taking the money out of politics,” legislate full and timely disclosure of all contributions (i.e., within 48 hours or when the contributions are made), totally repeal McCain-Feingold, and put the kibosh on the FEC’s mischief.
_________________________

UPDATE 1, 10:30 AM Sept. 20: Jack Lewis (”FEC carries water for DNC”) compares the spending using real numbers, noting almost $250 million in contributions to political campaigns just from the top 10 unions during the most recent election cycle.
________________________

UPDATE 2, 11 AM Sept. 20: Give credit where it’s due: RedState.org diarist Vadum was on this story within an hour of its release yesterday. Vadum speculates that since CFG, contrary to AP’s “pro-Republican” characterization, aims a lot of its efforts at defeating free-spending Republicans (Republicans In Name Only, or “RINOs”), the FEC action may have something to do with CFG’s criticism of Campaign Finance Reform godfather John McCain.

Memo to RedState guys: Why does someone have to look through every diary to see if a story is being covered? (FEC story is currently a diary highlight on the front page, but I don’t think it was last night)