Defending Brady Again
ArchPundit
Part of the screed goes into how Brady violated FEC rules while Jack Roeser’s honest mistake was just about negotiations.
Let’s look at the Brady problem. Brady’s Federal Account had no activity since his year end report in 2000. Brady and Eugene Funk, his treasurer, then failed to file the 2001 end of year report, made all reports in 2002, and then screwed up 2003 adn 2004 reports by filing late and getting late notices. The only reason the account was left open was Brady had loaned himself $50,000 with $42,000 of that unpaid and about $35,000 cash on hand. He probably left it open with the theory that he could get the extra $7000 from somewhere. It was a dumb choice, but mainly careless. There were no monetary transactions after the end of the year in 2000 so not filing was dumb for the reason we now are talking about it, but nothing more than a technical violation since nothing was being hidden. In each case, Brady dealt with it within a few months.
On the other hand, Roeser’s violations were violations of reporting money contributed to his PAC. It’s fine to say that he gave the money and so it isn’t a big deal, but the entire point of campaign finance disclosure is to enable voters to determine from where the money is coming. Roeser gets fined and then ignores it for nearly four years—only getting around to it after the Trib and others started to ask questions.
Brady made a series of dumb mistakes. Roeser found the time to fund an number of candidates and issues over four years, but couldn’t be bothered to follow the primary requirement of Illinois election law.
But worse is the absolute dishonest of the actual charge from FTN. They don’t even mention the delinquent reports, but instead focus upon an administrative termination.
More incredibly, Brady fails to mention that on June 8, 2004, the Federal Election Commission administratively terminated one of his campaign committees ? the one from his 2000 failed race for Congress. Brady is proposing Federal election type rules for Illinois ? but yet he apparently had trouble complying with the Federal reporting obligations after his Federal campaign ended. So the FEC eventually just terminated Brady?s Federal committee on its own.
Administrative termination is not something done because of a violation. It is done when certain circumstances are met and the campaign does not object:
? 102.4 Administrative termination (2
U.S.C. 433(d)(2)).
(a) The Commission, on its own initiative
or upon the request of the political
committee itself, may administratively
terminate a political committee?s
reporting obligation on the basis
of the following factors:
(1) The committee?s aggregate reported
financial activity in one year is
less than $5000;
(2) The committee?s reports disclose
no receipt of contributions for the previous
year;
(3) The committee?s last report disclosed
minimal expenditures;
(4) The committee?s primary purpose
for filing its reports has been to disclose
outstanding debts and obligations;
(5) The committee has failed to file
reports for the previous year;
(6) The committee?s last report disclosed
that the committee?s outstanding
debts and obligations do not
appear to present a possible violation
of the prohibitions and limitations of
11 CFR parts 110 and 114;
(7) The committee?s last report disclosed
that the Committee does not
have substantial outstanding accounts
receivable;
(8) The committee?s outstanding
debts and obligations exceed the total
of the committee?s reported cash on
hand balance.
(b) The Commission shall send a notification
to the committee treasurer of
its intent to administratively terminate
that committee and may request
the treasurer to submit information
with regard to the factors set forth at
11 CFR 102.4(a). The treasurer shall respond,
in writing, within 30 days of receipt
of the Commission?s notice or request
and if the committee objects to
such termination, the committee?s response
shall so state.
(c) The Commission shall administratively
terminate a committee if such
committee fails to object to the Commission?s
action under 11 CFR 102.4(b)
and the Commission determines that
either:
(1) The committee has complied with
the debt settlement procedures set
forth at 11 CFR part 116.
(2) The Commission has approved the
forgiveness of any loan(s) owed the
committee which would have otherwise
been considered a contribution under
the Act in violation of 11 CFR part 110;
(3) It does not appear from evidence
available that a contribution in violation
of 11 CFR parts 110 and 114 will result.
Trying to equate an administrative termination with a failure to disclose is
A) A deliberate lie
or
B) An act of incredible ignorance
There are no entries in the Enforcement Query System related to Bill Brady
Cross posted at Illinoize