iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Karl Rove 'Issue Ads' Attacking Elizabeth Warren Help Hide His Group's Donors

Posted: 12/14/2011 2:27 pm

WASHINGTON -- An ad released Dec. 8 by the conservative nonprofit Crossroads GPS, which is linked to Karl Rove, paints Democratic Senate candidate Elizabeth Warren as a tool of Wall Street who failed in her role chairing the Congressional Oversight Panel tasked with overseeing the bank bailout. But viewers of the ad are not urged then to oppose Warren's candidacy. Instead, they are encouraged to call the Warren campaign and let her know, "We need jobs, not more bailouts and bigger government."

As 2011 winds down, the expected onslaught of direct advocacy spending by independent groups has not materialized in reports filed with the Federal Election Commission. What groups like Crossroads GPS have spent millions of dollars on are issue advertisements, such as the Warren spot, which link candidates to issues like job creation, the environment and government spending, while avoiding FEC disclosure requirements.

According to a Huffington Post review of Crossroads GPS press releases, the group has spent $26 million on issue ads in 2011, nearly matching the $26.4 million the group spent in 2010 on direct electoral ads.

This is the shape of the new campaign finance reality created by the Supreme Court's 2010 Citizens United decision. That ruling allowed corporations and unions to freely participate in elections by funding or running independent campaigns that support or oppose candidates. Nonprofits were freed to do the same with the added benefit of not having to disclose their donors to the public.

Nonprofits, however, were saddled with one requirement. To qualify for nonprofit status with the Internal Revenue Service, groups must spend more than 50 percent of their funds on non-electoral efforts. To help meet that 50 percent threshold, nonprofits like Crossroads GPS have been pouring money into issue ads aimed at lawmakers in contested districts.

"They are running what they characterize as issue ads now, and they are doing so largely to balance their books to make their best efforts to comply with IRS rules," said Paul Ryan, the FEC director at the Campaign Legal Center.

Issue ads in politics have long been controversial. From the 1988 Willie Horton spot hitting Massachusetts Gov. Michael Dukakis to the 1996 Democratic National Committee issue ads promoting President Bill Clinton, they have often looked like stealth electoral ads.

Crossroads GPS states that its issue ads fall within its mission to support "free enterprise, low taxes and limited government."

"We believe that advocating on public policy issues being considered in Washington is one of the most important rights guaranteed by the Constitution, and are thankful it has been upheld by the Supreme Court," Crossroads GPS communications director Jonathan Collegio said via email. "The most effective issue advocacy usually focuses on Members who are considered most likely to be swayed in an issue debate. Last summer, Crossroads GPS spent more than $15 million advocating for a debt limit solution that cut spending while not raising taxes, by running ads in states whose Representatives and Senators were thought to be persuadable. The result was a deal that achieved virtually all that we were advocating for, even though President Obama was pushing hard in the other direction."

Unlike the $15 million worth of issue ads designed to pressure lawmakers on the debt limit debate, about $3 million worth of ads purchased by Crossroads GPS feature more direct attacks on vulnerable incumbents and candidates. Some of the group's ads also target candidates who do not hold an office that can be lobbied. The anti-Warren ad falls into this category.

An issue ad normally promotes a vote or a viewpoint that requires action by the intended target. It is a grassroots lobbying tool aimed at the general public to pressure public officials, whether members of Congress or the president of the United States. But Warren holds no elected position, nor does she work in any governmental capacity with the ability to affect an issue.

"There's no way that a person who is not a member of a legislative body can be lobbied," the Campaign Legal Center's Ryan said. "You can't lobby someone who isn't an elected official. They're election ads, plain and simple, masquerading as issue ads."

"What it shows is the extent to which this is a ruse," said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, executive director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center. "The idea that you should call someone as the desired end of an ad, that doesn't make a great deal of sense if the person doesn't hold office."

Since November, Crossroads GPS has spent $407,022 on ads targeting Warren in the Boston media market alone, according to ad-buy data collected by Patch members based in Boston.

The Crossroads issue ads also appear to target only those candidates facing real opposition. The group has run more than one ad in contested Senate races in Florida, Massachusetts, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska and Ohio. Vulnerable freshmen Republicans like Reps. Sean Duffy (Wis.), Chip Cravaack (Minn.) and Quico Canseco (Texas) have received supportive issue ads, while vulnerable House Democrats like Reps. Ben Chandler (Ky.), Leonard Boswell (Iowa) and Tim Bishop (N.Y.) have been on the receiving end of negative issue ads.

Crossroads has revealed an explicit electoral consideration in aiming issue ads at Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.). The National Journal quoted communications director Collegio saying, "We want Ben Nelson to recognize that 2012 will be an extraordinarily grueling proposition in the case he decides to run."

BEYOND CROSSROADS

Crossroads GPS is not alone in spending its money on ads in contested districts. Americans United for Change, a progressive nonprofit group, has put ads in at least 14 different districts or states with only one or two run against lawmakers in uncontested races.

"The most important part of it is if they're on the side of an issue that is in contradiction to their district," explained Tom McMahon, executive director of Americans United for Change. "Sen. Scott Brown was an early target for us because he said he was going to go to Washington and not be beholden to the Republican leadership. He campaigned on one thing, on how he was going to be an independent-minded voice in Washington, but when he got here, he fell in line with what the Republican leadership wanted to do."

The Americans United for Change ads, unlike their Crossroads GPS counterparts, focus entirely on pressuring lawmakers on events and votes in Congress like the budget proposed by Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the debt ceiling deal and the super committee deadline. The groups also differ in that Crossroads GPS spent $26.4 million on electoral ads in 2010 while Americans United for Change spent nothing. The progressive group is devoted to issue advocacy and said it has no plans to play an electoral role.

The League of Conservation Voters runs both electoral ads, through a super PAC, and issue ads, as a nonprofit. This year the environmental group has targeted Sen. Brown, Warren's opponent in Massachusetts, with at least $1.1 million in issue ads.

A conservative group, American Action Network, has the same dual strategy. Its issue ads, totaling at least $1.7 million in 2011, have largely supported vulnerable Republicans who voted for the Ryan budget in the House. It also spent $3.4 million on electoral ads in 2010.

Watchdog groups have been up in arms over the nonprofit status of groups that spend large amounts of money on campaign ads. That these groups also run issue ads, the watchdogs argue, should not be enough to qualify as a social welfare organization, a kind of nonprofit organized under section 501(c)(4) of the tax code.

"These ads are part of an effort to influence the 2012 elections," said Democracy 21 President Fred Wertheimer. "The IRS standard does not require express advocacy for a communication to directly or indirectly participate or involve the organization in a campaign activity. In our view, these ads clearly meet the IRS standards for being campaign-related ads."

Democracy 21 and the Campaign Legal Center are asking the IRS to deny nonprofit status to four groups that appear to have a primary function of influencing elections and have filed as nonprofits to hide their donors. These four nonprofits are Crossroads GPS, American Action Network, Priorities USA and Americans Elect.

"Political operatives are avoiding disclosure by claiming 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status for groups that are plainly dedicated to influencing the 2012 process," said the Campaign Legal Center's Ryan. "We believe that they're running sham issue ads. They have acknowledged that they are targeting battleground states. That to us strongly suggests or establishes that Crossroads' primary purpose is to influence the 2012 election. We think that they've improperly claimed 501(c)(4) status."

Crossroads GPS and its sister group, the super PAC American Crossroads, have set a goal of raising $300 million for the 2012 election. So far, the majority of the money they have raised has come through Crossroads GPS and has thus not been disclosed. According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the two groups have raised a combined $95 million, but American Crossroads has reported raising only $34.7 million to the FEC. That means Crossroads GPS has raised $60.3 million in undisclosed contributions, two-thirds of the total since the duo was founded in 2010.

The IRS has so far rebuffed calls to investigate or deny nonprofit status to these groups.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
 
 
  • Comments
  • 3,641
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Highlights
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (82 total)
  1 of 1  
COMMUNITY PUNDITS
photo
ghee99 05:47 PM on 12/14/2011
sure, its always important to consider the source (at least take it into account)

of course, in issue ads, if the ads are correct, and point out what a candidate has done on this or that issue

especially if its in regard to things that are both true and that the candidate is trying to keep hidden, can actually be a service to the voter.

as such, equally (or perhaps more) important than  Read More...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
soma77
Author, Speaker, Retreat Facilitator
02:02 PM on 12/29/2011
If the 1% is against Elizabeth Warren then the 99% should be for her.
one09flat04
Octogenarian
09:26 AM on 12/27/2011
Bottom line on Rove associations is that they support either whatever actions are illegal or actions that should be illegal! They are willing to finance, lie, cheat and support any candidate for office that will deregulate or get rid of any ruling or law that keeps them from illegally filling no matter the injury, risk or detrimental it is to citizens to fill their pockets with ill gotten money! Of course they oppose Warren...she stands for rightiousness, legallity and the protection of the public! Roland C. Woodaka
photo
psychophil
Don't listen to me.
10:46 PM on 12/15/2011
So the attack on Elizabeth Warren is that she's too pro-Wall Street? That doesn't pass the laugh test. Clearly, Scott Brown's anonymous supporters think Massachusetts voters are suckers. If you're a Massachusetts voter, how do you react to that?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
opn2itsd
"progress" is actually positive
05:43 PM on 12/15/2011
For sale: one government, used.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TheIndependenceParty
Cranky yankee and a rehabilitated ex-Republican
04:14 PM on 12/15/2011
If what the wealthy Rove patrons advocate is so good for America, why do they insist on hiding behind this portly little man?

That was, of course, the purpose of knowing the donors behind and against candidates, ... to associate their giving with the purpose it sought to promote.

SCOTUS turned a Democratic Republic into a Plutocracy, with the stroke of a pen.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Don Glenn
Tree Hugging Novelist With Guns
02:48 PM on 12/15/2011
Once again the Rove Republicans are counting on an America that does not keep score. Hey Karl that ship has sailed. Karl Rove, Karl Marx Hmmm? Is there anything in a name. Does he want total control?
photo
Phxflyer
I think, therefore I am not republican
02:44 PM on 12/15/2011
Typical republic cowards, hiding from the light of day.
photo
runtwelds
Father, Educator, & Artist
02:40 PM on 12/15/2011
When we look back and wonder when the downward spiral of our once powerful nation began, it won't be W, or Regan, or Clinton or Obama, it will be when the Supreme Court ruled that corporations are people and they can spend unlimited amounts of money anonimously on candidates.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kimbutgar
02:30 PM on 12/15/2011
I just hope some group educates the public about who GPS is and how the donors are anonymous. The money could come from foreign countries like China to influence our elections. Just saying.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
l78lancer
Wisdom is the principal thing
02:22 PM on 12/15/2011
Even though the Supreme Court is majority conservative, it is hard to claim that it is not an activist court. Their decision with Citizens United was legislating from the bench. The problem is that they helped to make a messy and convoluted "system" of campaign finance entirely more scred up.
01:50 PM on 12/15/2011
How is America a Democracy when someone like Karl Rove has the power he has?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
whosallen
Left-Leaning-Liberal-Lunatic & Proud of It!
01:36 PM on 12/15/2011
Issue ads do not a not-for-profit make.....oh wait ... this is the counrty that has decreed corporations are people.
01:34 PM on 12/15/2011
If you haven't already, I encourage you to join and contribute to Elizabeth's campaign.
http://elizabethwarren.com/welcome?sc=ad_g_nat_s_ad3_p&gclid=CIS2y7vbhK0CFcYZQgodRR1oSw
photo
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
HLL
My little dog — a heartbeat at my feet ^..^
01:55 PM on 12/15/2011
F & F
02:06 PM on 12/15/2011
And for those who would like to donate to Scott Brown's campaign:

http://www.scottbrown.com/donate
05:18 AM on 12/20/2011
of course, no one wants to contribute to scott brown. that's pretty obvious.
photo
matt gordon
One nation, under Canada and over Mexico...
01:29 PM on 12/15/2011
Rove must be allergic to integrity since he has avoided contact with it for decades. The two-faced duplicitous republicans thwarted Warren's efforts on the new Consumer Bureau, then aggressively thwarted and threatened to keep her from being nominated to lead the Consumer Bureau. Warren is not a failure by any means. They must have felt threatened by her skills and intellect to wage such a vicious attack against her. Sadly the efforts against Warren are also efforts *against* the American people since she was working to grow and enforce rules that protect American consumers in transactions with banks, finance companies, etc.

Clearly the Congress and Senate are not working for the best interests of American consumers.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Activist Annie
03:34 AM on 12/22/2011
Thanks for your posting.

It seems that some men are intimidated by women who are intelligent, knowledgeable and who speak out. Karl Rove is one ... to his detriment.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftLeaner
Independent Populist
01:10 PM on 12/15/2011
The DEMS better learn to play even dirtier than Rove, because they're not messing around...They're in it to win it....at ALL costs.

Wake up Dems, and fight THEIR fight
01:58 PM on 12/15/2011
It is not possible to play dirtier than Rove. As inventor of swiftboating, he is probably the dirtiest politician ever to slither across the national political stage. Instead of trying to outdo him in dirt, those who fall victim should attack Karl Rove directly. Make it clear that if he is behind anything it reeks of corruption, dishonesty, and foul play. No one loves him. Attacking someone who has no character is not character assassination.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
kimbutgar
02:31 PM on 12/15/2011
Expose the cretin to sunlight and educate people that he is a shadowy figure with shadowy money.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Activist Annie
03:37 AM on 12/22/2011
Slither is the best description for Rove.
photo
psychophil
Don't listen to me.
10:47 PM on 12/15/2011
Their fight only works when the truth isn't on their side. When the truth is on your side, it pays to be honest..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
LeftLeaner
Independent Populist
09:10 AM on 12/16/2011
Oh realy, then how did John Kerry get labeled soft on Defence, and questioned of his military record????

GWB never serverd, and was recognized as the candidate "tough" on defence...even with 911 on his watch.

Get real, politics is tough and dirty, and to win, we need to play by THEIR RULES...or we'll lose, AGAIN.