Roger Wicker has a nice edge in fundraising over Democratic challenger, former Governor Ronnie Musgrove. The race is tied according to last two polls. Musgrove is not going to be the most progressive Senate candidate ever, but he is a H*LL of a lot better than Rubber Stamp Roger Wicker.
We have blogged about Roger Wicker's abysmal voting record to the point we are blue in the face at Cotton Mouth. Today we find out that his fundraising is not only backed by special interests (Wicker is a king of pork, with a revolving door), but that Wicker is playing dirty pool.
The Musgrove for Senate campaign today filed a complaint with the Federal Elections Commission (FEC) against Roger Wicker for accepting illegal campaign contributions. Wicker accepted contributions from individual donors and PACS in excess of the limit set by federal law by "double dipping" from two 2008 campaign accounts to fund his race for Senate.
Wicker violated federal election law by having contributors donate to his 2008 House reelection committee and his 2008 Senate election committee then combining the funds to exceed the limit allowed by law. This "double dipping" is illegal under federal elections law.
Following Wicker's transfer of $550,000 from his House Committee to his Senate Committee the FEC inquired about the funding. In response, Wicker said the transfers consisted solely of contributions from a previous election cycle. As the facts demonstrate, this was a false statement.
Wicker did not have adequate funding in his House account prior to the 2008 cycle to transfer the funds. Some of the contributions from the $550,000 transfer were matched in the senate account to exceed legal limits. The illegal contributions are listed below.
"Roger Wicker and his allies have proven that they will not let the law stand in their way in a desperate attempt to save a failing campaign. This type of Washington politics needs to change," Tim Phillips, Musgrove for Senate campaign manager said. "Rather than wait for the FEC to fine him, Wicker should return the illegal contributions."
The contributions received in excess of the contribution limits are listed below:
· $5,600 from Roy Anderson III: Wicker for Senate accepted contributions from Roy Anderson III totaling $4,600 during the 2008 election cycle. Friends of Roger Wicker accepted contributions from Roy Anderson III totaling $1,000 during the 2008 election cycle.
· $4,700 from Larry Homan: Wicker for Senate accepted contributions from Larry Homan totaling $2,700 during the 2008 election cycle. Friends of Roger Wicker accepted contributions from Larry Homan totaling $2,000 during the 2008 election cycle.
· $6,900 from W.D. Mounger: Wicker for Senate accepted contributions from W.D. Mounger totaling $4,600 during the 2008 election cycle. Friends of Roger Wicker accepted contributions from W.D. Mounger totaling $2,300 during the 2008 election cycle.
· Wicker Accepted $6,900 From Joe Sanderson: Wicker accepted $4,600 from Joe Sanderson on January 25 for his Senate campaign. He previously accepted $2,300 from Joe Sanderson for his House campaign bringing Sanderson's total contributions to $6,900.
· $5,500 from Todd Threadgill: Wicker for Senate accepted contributions from Todd Threadgill totaling $4,500 during the 2008 election cycle. Friends of Roger Wicker accepted contributions from Todd Threadgill totaling $1,000 during the 2008 election cycle.
· $15,000 from BanCorp South Bank PAC: Wicker for Senate accepted contributions from BanCorp South Bank PAC totaling $10,000 during the 2008 election cycle. Friends of Roger Wicker accepted contributions from BanCorp South Bank PAC totaling $5,000 during the 2008 election cycle.
· $13,800 from EADS North America: Americans for Competition in Aerospace PAC: Wicker for Senate accepted contributions from EADS North America: Americans for Competition in Aerospace PAC totaling $10,000 during the 2008 election cycle. Friends of Roger Wicker accepted contributions from EADS North America: Americans for Competition in Aerospace PAC totaling $3,800 during the 2008 election cycle.
But that DSCC job for Musgrove (y'know, the one with that new ad smell), that was kosher, right?
ReplyDeleteMr. Tower,
ReplyDeleteAs you can see the media is loves Musgrove even though most of the state doesnt. It would only be fair if both stories were in the news, but again the liberal media wants Musgrove to win. There is nothing fair about this what so ever and this blog wont say a word about the bigger problem of the two.
ivory tower,
ReplyDeleteYes, the DSCC ad was entirely kosher, and legal, as opposed to Roger Wicker's ignoring (if not willingly breaking) federal campaign finance laws.
ivory tower, this isn't a blog about ideology or consistency, it is only about hitting Republicans and defending Democrats. They will print what Musgrove sends out. If he claims Wicker violated the law, they will repeat it. Now we can all see the ad the Dems are running for Musgrove on tv. The FEC's limit on coordination between the DSCC and Musgrove's campaign is $180,800. If you saw the Wicker release you know the DSCC ad value is over $240K without figuring production costs which also count. The DSCC already coordinated over $55K with Musgrove. So the DSCC broke the limits by $115K, but it is kosher. This might was well be a mouth piece for Musgrove for Senate, but in their defense, it is a free country and anyone can start a blog and say whatever they want. So if this is what they want to say, we're lucky they let us respond.
ReplyDeleteI love when Mich comments. He puts no thought in what he says which comes off sounding ignorant and uninformed. He must read this blog for fact. As we are reminded, this is a free country and some people just don’t get it, or sound like they don’t.
ReplyDeleteAnd again, just for the record:
ReplyDelete"The DSCC is a national political party committee registered with the Federal Election Commission, and is comprised of sitting Democratic Members of the United States Senate. It raises and spends money within federal contribution limits and source restrictions to carry out activities in support of Democratic candidates for U.S. Senate, including get-out-the-vote activities, voter registration and voter identification, and direct candidate support. "
Way to go Mitch!! Thata boy!!
ReplyDeleteNow you sound like you know what your doing.
That’s all well and good Mitch, but they spent way over their limit.
There is a limit on how much they can spend and it goes by voter age population.
http://www.fec.gov/info/charts_441ad.shtml#Senate
As you can see the limit in Mississippi is $180,800. Since the race started, the DSCC has spent $295,347 on Ronnie, $114,547 over the limit.
The Ad clearly is touting Ronnie and his laughable record as Governor. And the guy is in it. A clear coordination between the 2 is clear as day. From what it looks like, legally the DSCC has spent its allotment on Ronnie for this year.
You’ve got to admit it’s very questionable.
Those limits only apply to communications that meet the FEC criteria to be considered coordinated.
ReplyDeleteThe point is, this ad does not meet the three-pronged test to be considered such.
Personally I believe in no limits and full disclosure. I'm glad to see the Democrats coming around and joining me, even defending unlimited campaign spending.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mitch.
ReplyDeleteWhen the Republicans say 'jump" their folks jump even when it's as illogical as this.
The DSCC and NRSC have both spent millions of dollars in dozens of races since the new campaign finance laws were put in place.
If the Wicker campaign thought that kind of spending was illegal perhaps they should have challenged it one of the dozens of other instances.
It's legal and Republicans shouldn't be too upset because it's not a particularly good ad. Sheesh.