Playing fast and loose with the FEC

If you’re just joining us, the Federal Elections Commission has effectively ceased to function, due to a dispute over nominees between the Bush White House and Senate Dems. This may seem like inside-pool, but it’s an interesting example of how Republicans choose to do business these days.

Here’s a quick primer. There are currently four vacancies on the FEC, two of which are to be filled with Republicans, two of which to be filled by Dems. For one of the GOP’s selections, Bush tapped Hans von Spakovsky, a top political appointee in Bush’s Justice Department, best known for his scandalous disenfranchisement work. Dems, most notably Barack Obama and Russ Feingold, balked, pointing to von Spakovsky’s work in voter-suppression schemes.

At that point, Bush and his Senate cohorts had a few options: 1) withdraw the von Spakovsky nomination, and replace him with a less ridiculous choice; 2) allow votes on the nominees individually, clearing the way for at least three uncontroversial nominees to clear the chamber easily; or 3) demand one vote on all four nominees, including von Spakovsky, refuse to compromise, and allow the FEC to shut down in an election year. Surprise, surprise, the GOP picked Door #3.

That was six months ago. Now, the White House has a “compromise” idea. What could possibly go wrong?

Spakovsky remains a nominee. Instead, the administration has submitted a new nominee to replace the current chairman, David Mason. Mason is one of the only two seated commissioners, and it just so happens that he’s been creating a whole lot of trouble for John McCain lately.

In February, the McCain campaign notified the FEC that it was withdrawing from the public financing system for the primary. Although McCain had once opted in, his campaign said that it had never received public funds and so could opt out. The move meant that McCain would not be bound by the $54 million spending limit for the system.

But Mason balked. McCain couldn’t just opt out — the FEC had to approve his request before he could. And Mason also indicated that a tricky bank loan might mean that McCain had locked himself in to the system. That would be disastrous for the campaign, since the Dem nominee would have a tremendous spending advantage through August. So McCain’s campaign has continued to spend away, far surpassing the limit already. The Democratic Party has filed a complaint with the FEC and has also taken the matter to court.

So, under the “compromise,” the Bush gang would continue to push the offensive nominee Dems hate, and remove the FEC commissioner who actually believes in forcing McCain to follow campaign-finance law.

How could Dems possibly turn down a sweet deal like this one?

As Fred Wertheimer of Democracy 21 put it: “The only apparent reason for President Bush to drop Commissioner David Mason at this stage, an FEC candidate he had twice proposed for the Commission, is to prevent him from casting an adverse vote against Senator McCain on important enforcement questions pending at the Commission. The questions deal with Senator McCain’s request to withdraw from the presidential primary public financing system and the consequences of a loan the McCain campaign took out and the collateral provided for the loan.”

As of yesterday, Republicans are willing to sweeten the pot a little. The White House will keep pushing Spakovsky, but Senate Republicans are now willing to let members vote on him separately, instead of all four nominees as a package vote.

A spokesman for Democratic Leader Harry Reid of Nevada criticized the White House for not withdrawing Mr. von Spakovsky’s nomination. But in a statement, the spokesman, Jim Manley, indicated that Senate Democrats were ready to move beyond the dispute. “We will work towards the confirmation of the remaining nominees and expect to defeat Mr. von Spakovsky,” he said.

Democrats grumbled about the White House’s decision to pull Mr. Mason’s nomination. The FEC chairman had angered some Republicans when he wrote a letter questioning whether Sen. John McCain could legally drop out of the public campaign-financing system for the primary election.

After Sen. McCain became the expected Republican presidential nominee in February and his fund-raising improved, he notified the FEC he would drop out of the public system, avoiding its spending caps. Mr. Mason responded that Sen. McCain couldn’t drop out without FEC approval and the FEC couldn’t do that without a quorum.

“By abandoning Mr. Mason and instead sticking by Mr. von Spakovsky, the White House has abandoned experience and independence for partisan loyalty,” Mr. Manley said.

As the NYT editorialized today, Dems really need to play this one smart, blocking Spakovsky and preventing the Bush gang from replacing Mason (qualified commissioner) with Donald McGahn (a Republican loyalist who was Tom DeLay’s lawyer).

Update: That was quick. Shortly after I posted this, the Senate GOP reversed course and said Republicans would tolerate no compromise. Dems can either vote on all four nominees at once, or the FEC would continue to be unable to function during an election year.

If the Democrats won’t confirm Von Spakovsky or refuse to bring the nominations to a vote because of the attempt to replace Mason, the FEC remains short of a quorum and is unable to hold McCain accountable. And it’s such a complex issue, there’s virtually no way the Democrats can explain it to the voters in a sound bite, so Bush can castigate them for crippling the FEC during an election year. Another example of government by BushCo and the Republicans: heads I win, tails you lose.

  • This is really not such a complex issue that voters can’t be helped to understand what’s happening here with the FEC. After all, most of the public is now aware of this administration’s politicizing of every agency within the Executive Branch: Justice, EPA, NASA, etc. This is simply one more example of that.

  • dalloway, Democrats can explain it very easily in one sentence: Bush is trying to game the system again, so that McCain can have an easier time stealing the election than Bush did.

  • Note that you can cut off the last half of that sentence and it remains a good (maybe even superior) soundbite.

  • Who could have predicted that this would happen?

    How many days are left in this idiot’s term?

  • The NYT editorial says that there are four vacancies on the FEC. But Mason makes five. The only remaining Commissioner is Ellen Weintraub, a Dem, but recess appointed in 2002 by Bush. I don’t think she was ever confirmed, and it appears that her “holdover” status violates the law. Theoretically, I suppose the Senate could approve of the two dem appointees and either Spakovski or McGahn, giving the FEC a quorum with 3 Dems and 1 Rep. But I’m guessing that there’s more to this story.

  • Well, that didn’t take long. TPM Muchraker is already reporting that McConnell is refusing separate votes again.

  • How could Dems possibly turn down a sweet deal like this one?

    Shhh…don’t jinx them. Never underestimate the Democrats ability to roll over for Bush. Hell, I think we can start the countdown to Hillary supporting this ‘compromise.’ It makes her 2012 run more plausible.

  • They had better quit playing. I am sure the GOP is drawing up campaign plans with a functioning FEC and without one. We are not going to get what we what, but we need an FEC for the election, without one all hell is going to break loose.

    Wasn’t von Spakovsky’s big voter suppression plan to keep ID-less voters from voting ? Supreme court ruled on that one, move along and get a functioning FEC. Bush isn’t going to drop von Spakovsky, why would he, out of decency, please. So we can either vote him in or leave the FEC with no power.

    I am so sick of the D’s, Reid in particular, bumbling around like a bunch of zombies complaining about fairness while the GOP steamrollers them. McCain is NOT going to get in trouble for campaign spending limits, get a bridge and get the fuck over it Reid and make a move. Maybe, just maybe, McCain’s spending issues can get played out in the media.

  • Now there’s a big surprise.

    There is no way they will seat anyone with the goopers playing fast and loose with the FEC rules. And once the election is over, oh, so sorry.

    How to hijack a country in 20 easy years. Yup, real easy to do.

    Read Orders and Acts and Lies. Oh my!

    I can only wonder what it will take to get our country back…or if it’s even possible at this point.

  • This is how bipartisanship works in the republican camp. Let this be a lesson to you Obama. When you consider reaching across the isle this is what you will be dealing with.

    Senate republicans believe in one tactic…obstructionism or do what we want. With all the dirty tricks they plan to pull they love the idea of not having a functioning FEC especially since it gets McCain off the hook during the election campaign. Dems need to stick to their guns…there will be a dem controlled senate and a dem president soon enough. Von Spankme should never get that commission because dems will not later be able to prevent him from destroying the FEC’s intentioned role. Republicans are trying to force everything before Bush term ends because they know they will be out of power. Don’t let them get their foxes in positions of authority…2009 is rapidly approaching…republicans are out.

  • Let all hell break lose, as long as people are aware that the blame for this clusterfuck lays in the same place as blame for all the others from the last 7 + years, with the Bush administration.

  • Bush: allow my crooked irresponsible nominee to be part of the election process or I’ll wear the system down. My way or the highway, the same way it’s been since the day I was sworn in.

    I’m not a smart guy, and I get it.

  • Dems, most notably Barack Obama and Russ Feingold, balked, pointing to von Spakovsky’s work in voter-suppression schemes. — CB

    Is that an oversight, or was Sen “let no voter in Michigan and Florida be disenfranchised” OK with the vile von S?

  • Comments are closed.