The Federal Election Commission last week quietly issued an advisory opinion allowing candidates to raise unlimited money for issue groups working on ballot measures in elections where those candidates are on the ballot.
The statement, issued in response to a request from a Nevada-based abortion rights group, could significantly change the landscape this fall in terms of the capacity that candidates affiliated with those groups have to help them raise money.
The decision applies to all federal candidates, but with a presidential election six months away, this race will receive the most attention. If Mr. Biden can raise money for abortion rights ballot measures, he can expand on a pre-existing fundraising advantage his team currently has over Mr. Trump.
The decision, which was publicly announced last week but received little attention, could impact voter turnout in battleground states like Nevada, where razor-thin votes will decide the election. In Arizona, an abortion rights group said it had the required number of signatures to place a referendum on the ballot. Florida — a state that has voted reliably Republican in recent presidential elections — has a similar measure on the ballot.
The opinion means both Mr. Biden and former President Donald J. Trump can raise money for outside groups pushing ballot measures. Following the overturning of the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark decision in Roe v. Wade in 1973, abortion ballot measures are likely to be a key issue for Democrats this fall.
“I think it’s pretty significant,” said Adav Noti of the nonpartisan Campaign Legal Center, calling it a huge shift from the bans put in place in the landmark 2002 McCain-Feingold campaign finance law.
The statement was issued May 1 in response to a question from attorneys representing the group Nevadans for Reproductive Freedom, which hopes to hold a referendum on the ballot in the fall. Several attorneys, including veteran Democratic election lawyer Marc Elias, are representing the group.
The statement noted that federal candidates and officials can raise funds for the group’s companies without being tied to dollar amounts or sources.
Recognizing how the parties might view the opinion, the National Republican Senatorial Committee questioned a draft of the measure a day before it was formalized. Objections included that such coordination between a candidate and an outside group would result in Nevada Democrats entering the election.
The committee also warned of a possible influx of foreign money into states because few of them prohibit such contributions to ballot measures.
As part of the draft, the committee’s lawyers wrote: “The risk of corruption associated with direct contributions from foreign nationals to candidates would simply be transferred to the ballot initiative context, with the same damaging effect.” The NRSC’s concerns went unheeded.
Of the FEC’s six commissioners, three Republicans and one Democrat agreed with that opinion.
A spokesman for the Biden campaign and a spokesman for the Democratic National Committee declined to comment.
RNC senior adviser Charlie Spies was ousted from office after just two months at a retreat for the committee’s donors in Palm Beach, Florida. A spokeswoman for the Trump team did not immediately respond to a question about whether Mr. Spie’s departure was at all related to the report.
But Chris LaCivita, a top adviser to Mr. Trump who now co-chairs the RNC as chief of staff, called the development an opening.
“We will use every opportunity available, including new ones, to defeat the corruption and failure of the democratic machine,” LaCivita said.
Mr. Noti said the bloc of commissioners has recently made other statements of significant importance, including expanding the capabilities of super PACs.
“The combined effect of these decisions is having a really significant and demonstrable impact on the way campaigns are run, and everything is for the worse,” he said.
Source link
2024-05-06 00:40:01
www.nytimes.com