Subforum open for State Candidate PAC talk

You know it seems to me a well-planned PAC would have multiple heads, American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS were a two-headed monster. That way you can do more and also raise more - potentially from big donors.
 
You know it seems to me a well-planned PAC would have multiple heads, American Crossroads and Crossroads GPS were a two-headed monster. That way you can do more and also raise more - potentially from big donors.

Interesting....could you elaborate on this a bit more? We definitely need to have the ability to cross over into more traditional fundraising channels, in order to have any sort of staying power.
 
Thanks Josh! :cool:

Question: Are PAC's allowed to spend money on advertisements or are they limited to funding candidates?
 
Interesting....could you elaborate on this a bit more? We definitely need to have the ability to cross over into more traditional fundraising channels, in order to have any sort of staying power.

Amer Crossroads is registered as a 527, which means it reports who donates.

Crossroad GPS registered as 501 c(4) (like CFL), which doesn't report who donates (from my understanding).

But both of those groups appeared to be run by Rove and company.


So, basically let's say the guy running Genesis wanted to donate $100,000 to our cause but didn't want it to be known - we'd send him to our 501 c(4), where-as someone like him might not donate to our transparent 527.

Also there are $ limits to certain types of PACS, but obviously hard to trace anything on others.

It also gives you more than one name to attack with, so in the event one ad campaign backfires somewhere, you still have the other group to work with.
 
Amer Crossroads is registered as a 527, which means it reports who donates.

Crossroad GPS registered as 501 c(4) (like CFL), which doesn't report who donates (from my understanding).

But both of those groups appeared to be run by Rove and company.


So, basically let's say the guy running Genesis wanted to donate $100,000 to our cause but didn't want it to be known - we'd send him to our 501 c(4), where-as someone like him might not donate to our transparent 527.

Also there are $ limits to certain types of PACS, but obviously hard to trace anything on others.

It also gives you more than one name to attack with, so in the event one ad campaign backfires somewhere, you still have the other group to work with.

Very interesting....I'm not sure what the legal red tape would be for something like this. I think it's ideal to have a PAC that deals with state candidates ONLY so as to avoid dealing with the FEC. However, if we were to make connections with a national, federally regulated 501 c(4), I don't know whether the contributions from one to the other would fall under FEC regulation or if it would need to be sanctioned by each state that we are registered in. (I would think that the FEC would have to be involved at some level in that transaction.)

I agree that we need to have other organizations which are closely connected....I think there might be orgs out there already that would be willing to satisfy that role, if we demonstrate that the relationship would be mutually beneficial....
 
Very interesting....I'm not sure what the legal red tape would be for something like this. I think it's ideal to have a PAC that deals with state candidates ONLY so as to avoid dealing with the FEC. However, if we were to make connections with a national, federally regulated 501 c(4), I don't know whether the contributions from one to the other would fall under FEC regulation or if it would need to be sanctioned by each state that we are registered in. (I would think that the FEC would have to be involved at some level in that transaction.)

I agree that we need to have other organizations which are closely connected....I think there might be orgs out there already that would be willing to satisfy that role, if we demonstrate that the relationship would be mutually beneficial....

There has recently been a FEC development that has made things at once more nebulous and clear-cut. The structure of many groups used to be c4, SSF (a connected PAC) and a 527. Now things are slightly different with the FEC allowing for both traditional SSF's and those engaging in exclusively independent expenditures (formerly the province of 527's) to be funded out of c4 monies. This is an enormous breakthrough, and opens some huge doors. You can see the new structure with Club for Growth (c4), Club PAC (traditional SSF) and their new Club for Growth ACTION (IE PAC).

I don't have time now, but if you'd like for me to elaborate on the differences (and respective benefits and drawbacks) at some point, let me know.
 
There has recently been a FEC development that has made things at once more nebulous and clear-cut. The structure of many groups used to be c4, SSF (a connected PAC) and a 527. Now things are slightly different with the FEC allowing for both traditional SSF's and those engaging in exclusively independent expenditures (formerly the province of 527's) to be funded out of c4 monies. This is an enormous breakthrough, and opens some huge doors. You can see the new structure with Club for Growth (c4), Club PAC (traditional SSF) and their new Club for Growth ACTION (IE PAC).

I don't have time now, but if you'd like for me to elaborate on the differences (and respective benefits and drawbacks) at some point, let me know.

Color me interested, although the plan is to avoid federal candidates altogether, which means that we wouldn't have to deal with the FEC
 
Color me interested, although the plan is to avoid federal candidates altogether, which means that we wouldn't have to deal with the FEC

Further info on this: "Nonconnected PACs must register by filing FEC Form 1 [PDF], Statement of Organization within 10 days after raising or spending in excess of $1,000 in connection with federal elections."

http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers_pac.shtml#pac

State elections are under the jurisdiction of the states.
 
Color me interested, although the plan is to avoid federal candidates altogether, which means that we wouldn't have to deal with the FEC

If you want to have a single PAC that contributes in multiple states, it will have to be filed federally. Unless you are planning multiple state level PACs with separate funding and no actual connection.
 
If you want to have a single PAC that contributes in multiple states, it will have to be filed federally. Unless you are planning multiple state level PACs with separate funding and no actual connection.

I don't believe that to be the case. Laws in most states seem to indicate that out-of-state PACs are acceptable for state financing, and that PACs which are not involved financially with any federal candidates are not required to report to the FEC (which is repeated on the FEC's website).

Here's an example of such an organization: http://www.dlcc.org/

The Democratic Legislative Campaign Committee (DLCC) works to win state legislative seats and chambers for Democrats.

You can see that they are listed in a document prepared by the Elections Division of the State of Alabama, with an address in Washington, DC: http://sos.alabama.gov/downloads/election/fcpa/paclist.pdf

Yet, if you search the FEC database, you will not find them: http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/disclosure_data_search.shtml
 
I don't believe that to be the case. Laws in most states seem to indicate that out-of-state PACs are acceptable for state financing, and that PACs which are not involved financially with any federal candidates are not required to report to the FEC (which is repeated on the FEC's website).

Here's an example of such an organization: http://www.dlcc.org/



You can see that they are listed in a document prepared by the Elections Division of the State of Alabama, with an address in Washington, DC: http://sos.alabama.gov/downloads/election/fcpa/paclist.pdf

Yet, if you search the FEC database, you will not find them: http://www.fec.gov/finance/disclosure/disclosure_data_search.shtml

I'm fairly certain DLCC is a 527, which is a specific type of federal PAC. ALL of the language on the donation form is boilerplate FEC regulation -- specifically, the employer/occupation required for contributions of over $200 and what is known as the "affirmation" (that 5-part check-box confirmation there).
 
Back
Top