Juxtaposition
The Huntsville Times on Bob Riley’s impression of Mitt Romney:
“This guy is a quintessential candidate. He really is. He’s nice looking. He’s articulate. He is imminently [sic] successful, if you look at what he did in the business world and you look at what he what he did with the (2002 Winter) Olympics,” said Riley.
“He’s almost the candidate that brings it all to the table.”
Well, at least he said “almost”.
Kyle Whitmire in the Birmingham Weekly on Romney’s Alabama PAC money laundering scheme:
Federal campaign laws limit donations from individuals to $2,300 — when the beneficiary is a candidate or already an elected national official. But here’s the first loophole Romney exploited: The former Massachusetts governor does not currently hold an office, and until a couple of weeks ago, he was not technically a candidate for president. Therefore, under federal law, he could take as much money from individual donors as he wanted.
Lawyers: 1. Common Sense: 0.
But there was another hurdle left. Specifically, most places have local laws limiting donations from individuals. In fact, there are only a dozen states where these donations are unlimited, and our sweet home Alabama is one of them.
In three of those states, Romney set up Commonwealth PACs to accept money from individual donors. To set up the Alabama franchise, the Romney campaign had to fill out a little bit of paper work no more difficult than a 1040EZ.
Lawyers: 2. Common Sense: 0.
In fact, so little of what the PAC does takes place in Alabama that we silly mortals might ask how something so spurious could even be legal. After all, if you want to donate to Romney’s Alabama PAC, you mail the check to Boston. If you want to talk to the PAC chairman, you call a Boston phone number. So what presence does Romney have here? The only thing this PAC seems to have in Alabama are those few pieces of paper at the secretary of state’s office.
Lawyers: 3. Common Sense: Forfeit.
Last year, many political opportunists noticed the flash cash Romney was passing out to Alabama Republicans — tens of thousands of dollars from his PAC. What wasn’t so obvious, though, was how Romney was quietly accumulating hundreds of thousands for himself.
To be exact: $514,535.
Almost, indeed.
But again, it is wrong to think of this money ever actually being here or even just passing through. The checks were not delivered to an Alabama address nor deposited in an Alabama bank. All that happened in Boston. And the donors hail from all over the country — Ohio, California, Texas and Colorado — but none from Alabama. And some are scurrilous characters, chief among them Bob Perry of Houston, Texas. Three years ago, he footed the bill for Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, which set him back $4.45 million. The $80,000 he gave Romney’s Alabama PAC must have sounded to him like a jingle in the Salvation Army bucket.
Yep, we’re being used, and not just by Romney, but, hey, no problem. Bob Riley thinks it’s a great idea!
Earlier this week, Gov. Bob Riley told the press that he didn’t have a problem with Romney’s PAC if it benefited Alabama Republicans. Fair enough, but unfortunately this arrangement doesn’t benefit Alabamians.
Because — surprise, surprise — that money doesn’t stay here.
…[Ed] Still [a Birmingham attorney who specialize in election law] said that, for Alabama to make money, we’d have to raise taxes — but this time on the politicians. And why not? If a penny more in sales tax is not too much for us to pay, why shouldn’t the politicos have to pony up, too? A PAC-to-PAC use tax, perhaps? What’s a penny to them? And the proceeds could go to a worthy cause, such as the Alabama Ethics Commission. With the extra money, it might finally be able to afford a political police force to investigate our civic scofflaws and their conniving contributors.
Sounds like a plan.
Hat tip, Del, for the Riley story.
February 13th, 2007 at 9:43 am
[...] UPDATE: And then I find this blog post which talks about Mitt Romney and his campaign finance loopholes. VERY interesting… [...]