On November 20, 2008, Greg Fischer’s legal counsel received a letter from the Acting Deputy Associate General Counsel for Enforcement at the Federal Election Commission. The letter concerned complaints filed against Fischer and Dant Clayton Corporation for allegedly violating campaign finance laws in 2008.
Here’s an excerpt from that letter:
On January 28, 2008, the Federal Election Commission (“Commission”) notified your client, Dant Clayton Corporation (“Dant Clayton”), of a complaint alleging violations of certain sections of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, as amended. On November 6, 2008, the Commission found, on the basis of the information in the complaint and information provided by Dant Clayton, that there was no reason to believe your client violated 2 U.S.C. 441b(a). Accordingly, the Commission closed its file in this matter.
Click here (Warning: PDF Link) to read a copy of the entire FEC letter.
Fischer had been using Dant Clayton computer systems and email accounts to handle official campaign business during the U.S. Senate primary in 2008.
While the FEC cleared him of any wrong doing on this one, specific account (not the dozens upon dozens of other instances which I’ve written about), one would think Greg Fischer would avoid the appearance of impropriety. One would think he’d know better than to continue using corporate resources – from the same company, no less – for campaign purposes.
One would think he’d take the FEC’s own words to heart. 2 U.S.C. 441b, section 114.9(a)(2) of the Commission’s regulations that provides a safe harbor for certain corporate facilities:
“occasional, isolated, or incidental,”
Occasional. Isolated. Incidental.
Instead, Fischer sent out a campaign email blast yesterday from his corporate account:
While Fischer’s mayoral campaign is regulated by the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance, this just isn’t satisfactory. He needs to take campaign finance regulations seriously. This is hardly “occasional, isolated, incidental” use of corporate facilities. And our state regulations prohibit corporate contributions just the same as federal regulations. He knows better.
When will candidates for elected office begin to take this seriously?
12 responses so far ↓
1 anon // Sep 29, 2009 at 1:13 pm
Fisher spends .000000001 cent to send an email and J.Payne throws a fit
King spends 150K and J.Payne wags his finger and looks the other way.
No wonder Rick left for the Mojo.
2 Yes, JB // Sep 29, 2009 at 1:56 pm
But Fischer doesn’t advertise on this site. That seems to make a difference.
3 jake // Sep 29, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Yeah, advertising obviously makes a difference. Because I’ve never criticized Jim King or his spoiled daughter, ever.
I love how Fischer’s supporters lose their shit when his mistakes get pointed out. Mistakes that the FEC investigated, no less, and pointed out needed to be isolated and incidental. But what happens? He does the same thing over and over again.
If you want me to unload on Greg Fischer, I most certainly will. He knows I’ve got a plethora of information just sitting here waiting. But I’ve given him the opportunity to clean up his messes.
Unfortunately, he told me these tiny campaign finance mistakes would not happen. On two occasions, actually, prior to announcing his candidacy. I promised him then that I’d have to call him out if they occurred.
But keep complaining. You remember 2008, right?
4 Curt Morrison // Sep 29, 2009 at 2:15 pm
anon-From what I’ve seen, all the news to date on the King’s scandal has been reported on Page One, hasn’t it? Curious what else you expect him to do?
(I’m calling for both their resignations, but I don’t expect everyone to be as demanding as me.)
5 Yes, JB // Sep 29, 2009 at 3:05 pm
No one said you have never criticized the Kings, but I think most would agree that your post-advertising attitude is certainly much less critical–in the old days you would have been all over that story. I believe I have read recent references to Katie being spoiled, but Jim has somehow been reformed, and even praised for taking full responsibility for the situation. Of course he would–if his daughter gets in trouble, she might lose her job and all that money would have been for naught.
6 jake // Sep 29, 2009 at 3:08 pm
As I’ve said a dozen or so times: King was advertising before I started criticizing.
And there are other advertisers who pay me way more money. His $$ makes up a tiny, tiny percentage of revenue.
But keep complaining. It makes me even more money.
7 Steve Magruder (I, not D or R) // Sep 29, 2009 at 3:42 pm
While a small blip, this indicates to me that Fischer apparently doesn’t have a fine attention to detail.
In that same e-mail, there is also a major honking misspelling.
Amongst all the staff he’s hiring up, I would hope he hires someone who can do some basic editing.
On top of that, in the e-mail, he touts his growing list of supporters, yet his Facebook page has far fewer supporters than Heiner’s page or Allen’s group. While social networking doesn’t comprise the entire campaign, it is indeed an indicator of natural support amongst the masses.
8 lexdem // Sep 29, 2009 at 4:20 pm
To answer your question, I suspect candidates will take campaign finance law seriously when there are actual consequences to the violations.
Until enforcement happens–not just slaps on the wrist and finger-wagging–we can expect campaigns to blatantly and repeatedly violate the laws.
9 Curt Morrison // Sep 29, 2009 at 4:29 pm
Snap.
Perhaps “and continuted to grow our list of supporters”…was a Freudian misspelling :)
10 KellyR // Sep 29, 2009 at 5:43 pm
The problem is, over the years, they have simply ignored all sorts of election related violations. A certain county official that regularly used a non-profit business as the base for his campaign, for example, including their address as his official campaign address, simply because he also happened to be their business manager. And claiming to live at one address when in fact he lived at another address, clear across the county, thereby committing a crime every time he voted ….
11 King Southern Jake // Sep 29, 2009 at 9:59 pm
Anon,
I’m informed. I’m savvy. I’m the leader among community campaign finance experts … from seven locations to serve you. Everyone knows that my buddies didn’t violate the law, knowingly or unknowingly; their attorneys said so. Whether you know (or don’t know) what I know (or don’t know), know that it’s time to move on …
… to jimkingformayor.com. You know what else? According to jimkingformayor.com, my buddies know how to “make tough decisions, watch the bottom line and be accountable.” And that’s all anyone needs to know.
I’m ready to listen. Jim King is ready to lead. Are you ready to follow?
Sincerely,
King Southern Jake
12 jake // Sep 30, 2009 at 12:14 pm
To the moderated individuals who continue to malign my personal character and that of Rick Redding, kept it up. I’ll eat you alive in court.
For the record, it’s no secret that Gill Holland is an investor in Full Signal Media Group.
And if anyone has questions about why Rick no longer writes for The ‘Ville Voice? Email me privately and we’ll talk.
I will not be bombarded by bullshit artists who feel it appropriate to air dirty laundry and attack people personally. If you have a bone to pick with us, stand up like an adult.
Leave a Comment