One standard that could be used to judge Congressman Walz's performance in his first term is the Beltway adversaries that he's earning by representing the people of the First in DC.
His vote for the CHAMP-Act, a bill endorsed by the AMA, AARP, the American Nurses Association, and dozens of other groups that work for kids and seniors, garnered attack ads. His response is now cited a model for fighting back against industry front groups.
His work on behalf of First District farmers and agriculture earned him attacks from the ideologues at Cato and the Club for Growth. We've reported a couple of times about the FEC's lawsuit against Club for Growth, as well as the feud between it and Walz over the Farm Bill. "The Club" didn't like it that Walz listened to his constituents at those 14 district listening sessions; he's also a target on "The Club's" jimmied-up, MNGOP-sanction "repork card."
But "The Club" itself is no model for transparent, grassroots-up government; rather, it in itself is a symbol of the Beltway culture that stymies so many ordinary citizens' voices.
Looks like "The Club" settled that lawsuit, and will pay "the largest civil penalty the FEC ever collected after an enforcement case has moved to litigation," according to CQ Politics' article Conservative ‘Club’ Clipped by Big FEC Fine. The entire article is packed full of "The Club's" various maneuvers. Some highlights:
Citizens Club for Growth Inc., a highly visible conservative activist organization, agreed to pay a $350,000 penalty to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) for failing to register with the agency as a political committee and report its contributions and expenditures.
The group, which has recently undergone a reorganization, is one of a number of groups that organized with the Internal Revenue Service under Section 527 of the tax code primarily to conduct “issues advocacy,” but have drawn loud criticisms for running independent advertising during political campaigns that appeared clearly aimed at persuading viewers to vote for or (more often) against a candidate — a form of electioneering communication that comes under the regulatory purview of the FEC and the fundraising limitations under federal campaign finance laws. . . .
. . .The agreement announced Wednesday would end a pending court case between the two parties, and if the deal is approved, it would be the largest civil penalty the FEC ever collected after an enforcement case has moved to litigation. . . .
. . .The court case stems from complaints and an investigation in which the FEC determined that Citizens Club for Growth Inc. accepted more than $10 million in contributions between 2000 and 2006 that exceeded the statutory limit of $5,000 per individual contributor, while also receiving more than $93,000 in corporate contributions, which FEC-regulated political organizations are barred from accepting. The commission also took issue with $15.1 million in expenditures by the organization between 2000 and 2004, which the agency states were connected to federal elections.
And this kind of rebranding does a lot for those fat cats who want to conceal the strings they pull, but does nothing for restoring public confidence in the process:
As the FEC made the agreement public, the “new Club for Growth” issued a press release stating it is a completely separate legal entity from the Club for Growth that was subject to the legal action, “is not a party to the settlement, and will not be affected by this settlement or any other anti-527 actions that may be taken by the FEC or Congress.”
The penalty agreement was not an admission of wrongdoing, according to David Keating, executive director for Club for Growth, who added that Citizens Club for Growth Inc. would be responsible for paying the fine.
Earlier this year, Citizens Club for Growth “sold its name and non-monetary assets to a new group” that currently calls itself Club for Growth, according to a recent press release. Keating explained Citizens Club for Growth is a Section 527 organization, while the new Club for Growth is organized under Section 501(c)4 of the tax code.
The new Club for Growth will continue to take part in various policy initiatives “never touched by Citizens Club for Growth,” according to the new Club for Growth’s release today. One of those initiatives listed includes “new congressional lobbying efforts on private equity and other vital economic issues.”
Club for Growth State Action registered as a lobbying organization in August 2006, and has spent at least $20,000 to lobby Congress to “oppose legislation to regulate 527 groups.” The group terminated its lobbying at the beginning of 2007, according to disclosure documents filed with the Senate.
We hope that passage makes everything about the "old" Club, the "new" Club and the "Citizens" Club for Growth clear. Right?
Comments