THURSDAY, SEPTEMBER 16, 2010


KLMNO


EZ SU THE FED PAGE


Disclosure of ‘issue ad’ funding is on the wane THE INFLUENCE INDUSTRY


T.W. Farnam A Supreme Court decision this


year dramatically altered the regulation ofmoney in politics, and a recent vote by the Federal Election Commission could change one area of the lawthat the court left intact: rules governing disclosure of the sources of campaignmoney. A key provision of the 2002


McCain-Feingold campaign finance lawcurbed so-called issue ads,which avoid spending restrictions by focusing on a candidate’s position instead of the election—an often subtle distinction. The Supreme Court has


whittled away at the statute, saying it infringes on free speech. But eight of the nine justices have expressed their support for the part of the law that requires disclosing sources ofmoney for issue ads. Despite the court’s


enthusiasm, there has been less and less disclosure of donors in recent years. In the 2004 election,when the lawwent into effect, 71 percent of the disclosure forms for issue ads listed the sources ofmoney. So far this year, only 15 percent of the disclosures have listed a source. The drop is partly due to a


change in the regulations in 2007 following the Supreme Court’s decision inWisconsin Right to Life v. FEC,which allowed corporate and union funding for issue ads. Inwriting its regulations after the court opinion, the commission said that only the donationsmade “for the purpose of furthering electioneering communications” must be disclosed. Among the groups that have


not disclosed their funding sources is the conservative American Future Fund,which has reported $3.6million in spending but has not disclosed any donors. Amessage leftwith the Iowa-based groupwas not returned. The newconservative group


Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies recently disclosed some $1.1million in funding without listing donations. Unions and corporate trade associations have also filed forms listing spendingwith no source, but theirmembership typically gives dues or contributions that are not


Decreasing disclosure Te share of “issue ad” disclosure forms reporting the sources of funding has dropped dramatically in the years since the regulation was introduced.


Number of “issue ad” disclosure forms Total files and the number filing that reported sources of donations by election cycle


Number reporting donations Number not reporting


2010 2008 2006 2004


15 117 71 184


85 372 42 75 SOURCE: Washington Post analysis of Federal Election Commission filings


earmarked for political ads. Watchdog groups say the


Federal Election Commission furtherweakened disclosure requirements lastmonthwith a split vote that stopped an investigation of the conservative group Freedom’sWatch. The group filed 58 disclosure forms in the 2008 election cycle before disbanding, but only two of themlisted contributions. The major source of funding for the group came fromcasino magnate Sheldon Adelson, the billionaire chairman and chief executive of the Las Vegas Sands Corp. A spokesman for Adelson declined to comment. The Democratic


Congressional Campaign Committee filed the original complaint against Freedom’s Watch, citing an article in the NewYork Times reporting that Adelson “insisted on parcelling out hismoney project by project”when giving to the group. The FEC’s general counsel


recommended that the commission open an investigation, but the three Republican commissioners voted against it, dismissing the complaint. The six-member commission is evenly divided between Republicans and Democrats. The Republican


commissioners said they interpreted the regulations to mean that a donation only needed to be reported if itwas for the specific advertisement included on the disclosure form. Thatmeans that even if Adelson had givenmoney to run


The Cable FOREIGN POLICY’S JOSH ROGIN Highlights from thecable.foreignpolicy.com


McCain,Grahamlash outat Levinoverbill The Senate is expected to take


up the defense authorization bill nextweek, but topRepublicans on the SenateArmed Services Committee are promising to oppose the legislation because of its language on gays in the military and the possible insertion of an amendment on immigration. Every year, both parties agree


to pass the defense bill,while large parts of the rest of the legislative agenda go uncompleted. For that reason, it is often viewed by senators as a convenient vehicle for other legislation theywant tomove throughCongress—whether or not it is related to themilitary. Last year, SenateArmed


ServicesCommitteeChairman CarlM. Levin (D-Mich.), to the chagrin ofRepublicans, successfully added language expanding protections fromhate crimes.This year,Democrats are expected to attempt to tack on the “AmericanDreamAct,” a bill thatwould provide a path toU.S. citizenship for illegal immigrant students. CommitteeRepublicans are


not happy. “This is an all-time lowforme


being in the Senate, and that’s saying something,” committee member LindseyO.Graham(R- S.C.) toldTheCable. “The one area that has been kept off-limits frompartisan politics has been the defense of our nation.” “Obviously it’s about politics,”


Grahamcontinued. “You’re trying to check a boxwith the Hispanic voters on theDream Act . . . this is using the defense bill in a partisan fashion that hasn’t been done before.” Actually, the bill has often


been the subject of partisan wrangling.What is unprecedented, however, is that it could come to the Senate floor


without the support of the committee’s topRepublican, Sen. JohnMcCain (Ariz). McCain adamantly opposes


the bill because it contains language that could lead to the repeal of themilitary’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy,which bans gay men and lesbians fromserving openly. Levin toldTheCable that he


expectsMajority LeaderHarry M.Reid (D-Nev.) to file cloture on the defense bill thisweek,which wouldmean itwould reach the floor early nextweek.


Millions reportedly


misspentonmeals TheU.S.Embassy inBaghdad


paidmillions to a government contractor formeals and snacks that nobody ate, according to a newinternal StateDepartment report. The department’s inspector


general found that the embassy overpaid bymore than $2 million, including nearly $1 million in snacks alone.The fundswent to contractorKBR, a former subsidiary ofHalliburton that runs food service for the 1,500-plus employees of the world’s largest embassy complex. Asignificant part of the


discrepancywas a result of the way people are countedwhen they stop by the “Grab-n-Go” snack stands at the embassy.This resulted in $970,000 paid toKBR it didn’t deserve, the report explained. Partial blame lieswith the


embassy, according to the inspector general. For example, the embassy staff encouraged employees to sign in every time they stopped by the snack areas, even if theywere just picking up a cup of coffee or going back for an apple.As a result, the report said, “itwas not uncommon to see 6-8 scans per individual for the samemeal period.One person scanned his card 25 times


in two days.” Embassymanagement even


put up signs last year that read, “More scans=more goodies.” This practice, among others,


resulted in inflated numbers being sent to the contractor. “OIG calculates the current embassy policy inflates the reported plate cost by 16 percent,” the report says. The embassy said that the


report’s description of howthe Grab-n-Go standswork is “not completely accurate” and that the money paid toKBRis based on the amount of food eaten, not the number of scans.


Seekmentalhealth


help,Clintonurges Following calls by the


inspector general to eliminate the stigma surroundingmental health and stress treatment, Secretary of StateHillary RodhamClinton is urging her employees to seek helpwithout fear of retribution. “Seeking help is a sign of


responsibility and it is not a threat to your security clearance,” Clintonwrote in an e-mail this month to all StateDepartment employees. “No one at State has lost a clearance because he or she soughtmental health counseling or treatment. In fact,Diplomatic Security has advised that receiving recommended treatment formental health concerns is a favorable factor during security clearance determinations.” In a July report, the inspector


general concluded thatmental health services for employees returning fromhigh-stress or high-threat postingswere improving but that therewas still a stigma attached to employees seeking help.The report called on State to issue a high-level statement encouraging returning diplomats to use themental health tools at their disposal.


THE WASHINGTON POST


advertisements generally, his namewouldn’t be required to be disclosed unless he directed his money toward specific ads. Campaignwatchdogs the FEC


decision signals to other interest groups that they needn’tworry about investigations into their funding. “Therewas no decisionmade


but they basicallymade clear where they’re standing,” said FredWertheimer, president of Democracy 21,which advocates for stricter regulation of campaign spending. Four voteswould have been


required to open the investigation; the commission voted 3-2 against thatmove, with one commissioner recusing himself. “This is an unprecedented


narrowreading of the regulation,” said commissioner EllenWeintraub,who helped draft the 2007 regulation requiring disclosure of donors. “It’s certainly notwhat I intendedwhen I voted for that regulation.” Weintraub said the regulation


was changed in 2007 to prevent an organization like a union fromhaving to disclose the names ofmillions ofmembers every time it ran an ad—not to exempt groups that spendmost of theirmoney on election ads. But DonMcGahn, one of the Republican commissioners, said hewasn’t sure howto read the requirement. “The enforcement process is not the place to determinewhat the rulemeans,” McGahn said.


CHUCK KENNEDY/THE WHITE HOUSE


Winners of the Samuel J.Heyman Service to AmericaMedals, which honor the contributions of federal workers, meet withMichelle Obama at the WhiteHouse. Top row, from left, SandraK. Brooks,Mark Brown, Col.Russell Coleman (who nominated a winning team of employees but was not an honoree), Obama, Jaime Lee, Steven Reichard and Susan Solomon. Bottom row, from left, Saskia vanGendt, ShaneKelley, Eva Ristow, Pius Bannis, SharonMorgan, Jeffrey Baker and Teri Glass. For more on the recipients, see the Federal Diary, B3.


The Boss Gregory B. Jaczko is chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, where employees give the agency high marks for being a good place to work. B3


Head of FBI’sD.C. office is promoted BY SPENCER S. HSU The FBI announced Wednes-


day that the head of itsWashing- ton Field Office, Shawn Henry, will leave by October to accept a promotion overseeing the bu- reau’s criminal, cybersecurity, emergency response and services branch. Henry’smove to a senior head-


quarters position means that the Washingtonoffice,oneof the larg- est and most prominent opera- tionswithinthe 33,000-employee bureau, will soon see its third director in less than a year. “It’s not a question of [FBI Di-


rectorRobert S.Mueller III]mov- ingMr. Henry out ofWashington


Field Office It’s a situation where the director needs Mr. Henry in FBI headquarters,” FBIWashing- ton spokeswomanKatherine Sch- weit said. “TheWFOis filledwith . . . capable agents, analysts and personnel who are aware of and used to the fact that our leader- ship and management model in- cludes changes at the top.” The FBI has promoted a string


of top officials after the departure this summer of Deputy Director John S. Pistole to lead the Trans- portation Security Administra- tion. As the incoming executive assistant director of what is known as the CCRSB, Henry suc- ceeds T.J. Harrington, who was promoted to replace the bureau’s associate deputy director, Timo-


thy P. Murphy, who took over for Pistole. For Washington, the moves


prolong a period of high turnover at the FBI’s second-largest field office. The office, with 1,700 em- ployees and 850 agents, oversees federal investigations of fraud, public corruption, terrorism and other national security matters acrossWashington and Northern Virginia. Henry, 48, who was previously


head of the FBI’s cyberdivision, tookover inWashingtoninFebru- ary for Joseph Persichini Jr., who retired in December amid an in- ternal investigation into allega- tions that he might have cheated on an FBI training exam. hsus@washpost.com


The Federal Worker


A23

Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92