Citizens United allowed unlimited donations, but in the decision the court pointed out that federal laws require donors identities to be disclosed. The court did not allow anonymous donations and pointed out that would be a check on large donations because voters would know why the donor is giving.
What Karl Rove perfected was using a non-profit 501(c)(4) to do electoral activity. Such (c)(4) organizations are allowed to take donations anonymously unlike electoral organizations. But, it is a misuse of a (c)(4) to become a purely electoral organization. So, they misuse the non-profit tax laws to violate the federal election laws.
Rove initially set up a 527 under federal election law. Those groups are allowed to take unlimited donations but they are required to report who the donors were. He found that he was not raising as much as he hoped. So, he set up a sister (c)(4) organization (shared office space and staff with the 527, so they were close sisters) and that made donors more comfortable because they could be anonymous. He raised about $60 million in 2010 and expects to raise $120 million in 2012.
So, we are asking the IRS to deny the non-profit status of (c)(4) organizations who are designed to circumvent the election laws. And, we are asking the Department of Justice to criminally investigate the organizations and the donors for avoiding the disclosure requirements of election law. And, we are asking U.S. Attorneys in states where the non-profits were active to do the same. DOJ/US Attorneys have jurisdiction over criminal enforcement of the federal election laws. We met with the FBI last November in Washington, DC about this. They asked to meet with us after receiving our complaints and they have been investigating since then and we have stayed in touch since then — hopefully something will come of it. Two U.S. Attorneys have now asked their local FBI to investigate based on our complaints. The FEC has civil enforcement jurisdiction, we filed complaints with them as well. But, the FEC was designed to do nothing with a 3 to 3 (3 Dems and 3 Repubs) commission, so they are pretty useless.
We’ll see — no doubt it is filled with land mines. Political opponents will accuse Obama of using the IRS and DOJ to go after his political opponents. But the reality is his political opponents are blatantly violating election and tax laws. We’ve urged DOJ to appoint a special prosecutor with a background in Republican politics to conduct the investigation to blunt that attack. The violation of law seems so obvious that any prosecutor who investigates will see that crimes have been committed.
KZ
I heartily applaud your efforts in this matter that is so essential to any hope of maintaining our democratic form of government in the future. But It seems to be highly unlikely that either the FBI or any U.S. Attorney would take up this matter absent some direction from the U.S. Attorney General and there is nothing in the correspondence to date to indicate to the contrary.
Similarly it is highly unlikely that the IRS would pursue consideration of anything beyond the question of tax free status for the 501©(4) organizations involved, and that they would likely defer to the Justice Department for consideration of any possible criminal violations.
It seems like a perfect scenario for every authority simply to pass the buck to someone else unless and until the Attorney General is brought on board, and that seems highly unlikely in a year leading up to a presidential election when it would be viewed by many as a self serving political move that could only move forward with Presidential approval.
I share your desires and cheer on your efforts in the matter, but I do not perceive how progress is being made. However, this is one case in which I will be thrilled to be proven wrong.