Showing posts with label Chad Alexander. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chad Alexander. Show all posts
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Oklahoma Higher Education is Anti-Second Amendment
The true story how Oklahoma Higher Education kill HB 3354 'Oklahoma Open Carry' and other Second Amendment bills in the Second Session of the Fifty Second Oklahoma Legislature, with the help of the OU Lobbyist Chad Alexander and Danny Hilliard.
Sunday, March 2, 2008
Tribal donations rise
Oklahoma's Indian nations are
increasing their political contributions.
increasing their political contributions.
OKLAHOMA CITY -- Oklahoma Indian tribes contributed more than $1 million to state politicians, parties and political action committees in 2006 and 2007, according to Oklahoma Ethics Commission reports.
Ninety percent of the money came from just three tribes.
The Chickasaws have given $408,100 since January 2006, the Choctaws have given $282,250 and the Cherokees have given $213,900.
All three tribes have been deeply involved in negotiating tobacco and gambling contracts with the state in recent years.
Energy interests and lawyers still contribute far more than Indian governments do, but tribal giving has grown perhaps as much as five-fold since 2000.
In no other state do tribes account for a bigger share of campaign cash, according to data from the Center for Responsible Politics, a campaign finance watchdog group.
Greg Pyle, the chief of the Choctaw Nation, said it is wise to give contributions to lawmakers.
Pyle said he asked a federal official a few years ago how a tribe could work successfully with state elected officials.
"The question he posed to me was, 'Did you help get them elected?' " the chief said.
Pyle said that in his travels around the country, he has seen that the most successful tribes support political campaigns.
The chief said it is important that when issues come along, Indian leaders "have a seat at the table."
"The lawmakers are busy people; everyone wants to see them, so it is important that they know you, and you can sit down and visit with them," he said. Now if an issue comes up, a lawmaker sometimes will pick up the phone to get the Indian tribe's viewpoint, Pyle said.
Rep. Lisa Billy, a Choctaw/Chickasaw Indian, said it is crucial that the tribes, who have branched into many business ventures besides gambling, work closely with the Legislature. Billy, R-Purcell, has organized an Indian caucus concerned with business endeavors of Indian tribes. About two dozen lawmakers are registered tribal members.
Indian nations have signed numerous compacts with governors over the past several decades. The federal government has held that states must negotiate with tribes on such matters as gambling.
State Ethics Commission records show that Gov. Brad Henry has received $33,750 from Indian tribes since 2006.
Billy said tribes give to both parties.
Democrats and Democratic PACs received $673,850, compared to $345,650 for Republicans and Republican PACs. Nonpartisan candidates and other PACs received $22,800.
In some instances, tribes gave to both candidates in a race. In 2006, the Cherokees gave $5,000 to incumbent state treasurer Scott Meacham, and $3,000 to his opponent, Tulsan Howard Barnett.
Although about two-thirds of the money went to Democrats, the largest recipient of tribal money was the Republican Legal Fund, which received a single $50,000 contribution from the Chickasaw Nation late last year.
Chad Alexander, listed at the Oklahoma Ethics Commission as chairman of the fund, said the money will be used for legal fees, which is all the explanation that current ethics law requires.
Alexander said various entities were asked to give money to the fund, and he is thankful that the Chickasaws decided to contribute. While tribes can only give a maximum $5,000 to an individual, there is no limit on how much it can give to a legal fund.
Chickasaw officials were not available late last week to comment on their contributions.
Among the lawmakers receiving contributions was Rep. Scott BigHorse, D-Pawhuska, who is a registered Osage. He received $32,500 in contributions from Indian tribes since 2006.
Rep. T.W. Shannon of Lawton received the most tribal money of any Republican. Shannon, a Chickasaw citizen, received $17,000 from Indian tribes during the two-year period.
By contrast, Oklahoma tribes contributed very little to congressional campaigns and federal party funds in recent years -- just $18,700, according to the Federal Election Commission.
Randy Krehbiel 581-8365
randy.krehbiel@tulsaworld.com
Mick Hinton (405) 528-2465
mick.hinton@tulsaworld.com
Saturday, March 1, 2008
Liquor wholesalers keep wine bill bottled up in committee
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) - Oklahoma wine makers fear their fledgling industry is doomed to wither on the vine unless they win the right to distribute their products to package liquor stores and restaurants without using a wholesaler.
But legislation that would set a statewide vote of the people on whether to do just that has been bottled up in a state House committee for much of the past year while wholesalers and wine producers haggle over details that opponents say threaten to undermine Oklahoma's three-tiered system of alcohol distribution.
Lobbyists for wholesalers and the Oklahoma Grape Growers and Wine Makers Association have met repeatedly with House leaders - including Republican House Speaker Chris Benge - over the past month to negotiate a compromise that would grant self-distribution to wine makers without threatening the system that has been in place since voters repealed prohibition in 1959.
The measure, passed by the Senate last year, is finally scheduled to be heard by the House Rules Committee this week.
The bill would order a statewide referendum on a constitutional amendment to permit Oklahoma wineries as well as wineries in other states to sell up to 10,000 gallons of wine a year directly to package stores and restaurants, more than many of the wine maker group's 55 family farm operations produce.
Oklahoma wineries were given that right in 2000 when voters approved a statewide referendum that gave small wineries the right to sell directly to retail establishments. The measure passed in all 77 counties with 78 percent of the vote.
The law was challenged by liquor wholesalers who said it discriminated against out-of-state wineries who were not allowed to sell directly to liquor stores or restaurants in Oklahoma. A federal just struck it down in 2006. "We just want to get back to where we were," said James McSpadden, who represents wine growers. "This would provide cheaper Oklahoma wine for consumers, which would make Oklahoma wine more successful in the marketplace."
Under the current system, McSpadden said, an Oklahoma wine maker who wants to sell a case of wine to a local liquor store must transport the wine to a liquor warehouse in Oklahoma City or Tulsa, where it has to sit for 24 hours before it can be trucked back to the liquor store in the winery's hometown.
"It's absurd," McSpadden said. "When we have to sell to a wholesaler, we have absolutely absurd drive times."
Many Oklahoma wineries grow grapes, make their own wine and operate small restaurants on their own property. But under current law, wine makers must sell and ship their wine to a warehouse which then sells and ships the wine back to the restaurant after a markup in price of about 20 percent, McSpadden said.
State wines can still be marketed in Oklahoma at special events like state and county fairs.
Gary Butler, past president of the wine makers organization and operator of the Summerside Vineyards & Winery in Vinita, said he has struggled to get bottles of his winery's Cabernets and Rieslings in local liquor stores since self-distribution ended.
"It's a little frustrating," Butler said. "The liquor stores are calling and the wholesalers are not carrying it. They're geared for big operations. The small wineries fall through the crack."
House Democratic Leader Danny Morgan of Prague, author of the wine bill, said it is only intended to bring wineries back to where they were before self-distribution was ruled unconstitutional.
"These is merely trying to help our local wineries try to get their product in the marketplace in a cost effective manner," Morgan said.
"I've really had some difficulty since we lost self-distribution," Butler said. "It's definitely not working."
A spokesman for liquor wholesalers, former state Republican Party leader Chad Alexander, said wholesalers fear self-distribution by wine makers will erode the three-tiered system of producer, wholesaler and retailer that has defined alcohol distribution in Oklahoma for almost 50 years.
"That's always been the concern," Alexander said. "If we have a self-distribution law, it affects everybody."
If state lawmakers alter part of the distribution system then other parts might also be changed or become ineffective, he said.
"We need to do it in a careful, responsible manner," Alexander said. "This is about the regulations of alcohol. That's the thing that got everybody concerned."
Morgan said the statewide referendum that allowed wineries to self-distribute in 2000 was proposed because wholesalers did not carry products from small Oklahoma wineries and when they did they added a substantial surcharge, making locally produced wines noncompetitive.
"When those wineries were allowed to self-distribute, I didn't see any erosion in what the wholesalers are trying to do," he said.
McSpadden said wine makers have agreed to many wholesaler demands for changes to the wine bill including prohibiting co-ops from self distribution, elimination of Internet sales and direct-to-consumer shipping and requiring wineries to distribute their own products, not those of others.
The measure also includes stiff penalties on any winery that exceeds the 10,000-gallon limit, including a $10,000 fine per infraction and elimination of self-distribution rights for three years after the second infraction.
"We've been working this bill hard," McSpadden said. But the level of support it will receive is hard to predict, he said.
Butler said changes are needed to help Oklahoma wineries become as successful as those in nearby states like Texas, whose wine industry generates $1 billion a year.
"People are interested in buying wines that are grown locally," Butler said. "But there are some flaws in the system for the small winery."
Friday, February 1, 2008
Surprisingly Liberal
Saturday, January 26, 2008
(Oklahoma) Campaigns heat up for Super Tuesday
Campaigns heat up forSuper Tuesday
Any of the presidential candidates could visit Oklahoma before voters go to the polls next week, campaign coordinators and volunteer workers say.
Campaign activity in the state is expected to intensify through the Feb. 5 Super Tuesday election, when 24 states — including Oklahoma — hold primaries or caucuses.
Candidates will spend most of their time in states that have more delegates, but campaign workers said each contender considers Oklahoma important.
No visits by any of the major presidential contenders is scheduled for this week in Oklahoma, but that could change if campaign strategists or schedulers can squeeze in a stop in the Sooner State.
Democratic contender Hillary Clinton, the first candidate to air TV commercials statewide, should get a boost when her husband speaks at a campaign rally and fundraiser on the University of Oklahoma campus. Former President Clinton — and possibly their daughter, Chelsea — will appear at a campaign rally Wednesday at the Lloyd Noble Center.
A fundraiser is set for 1:15 p.m. in the Courtside Club at the Lloyd Noble Center to raise money for Clinton. .
"In addition to being the only campaign on the air with a statewide ad, we are building on our already strong organization in Oklahoma with new staff, more volunteers and a flurry of campaign activity,” said Deirde Murphy, Oklahoma campaign communications director for Clinton.
Two Republican presidential candidates stopped by Oklahoma last week. Daniel Gilbert, a North Carolina businessman, and Jerry Curry, a retired Army general from Virginia, are long shots to win the Republican nomination. Curry made his formal announcement last week in Norman and will be campaigning in the state through Tuesday.
Workers for Democratic presidential contender Barack Obama, a U.S. senator from Illinois, have set up call centers in Ardmore and Oklahoma City where supporters are making nightly calls, said Ben LaBolt, with the Obama campaign.
"We believe in a race this tight, organization matters, and neighbor-to-neighbor conversations about why Barack Obama is the candidate who will bring change we can believe in are the most persuasive of all,” LaBolt said.
While the Clinton and Obama campaigns have brought in workers from other states, the campaign of Democratic contender John Edwards is relying on Oklahoma volunteers. There is no plan to open a campaign office in Oklahoma.
Edwards has been in Oklahoma the most recently. Two weeks ago, he made two stops three days apart.
Renzi Stone, an Oklahoma campaign spokesman and volunteer for Republican presidential contender Rudy Giuliani, said "a group of hard-core volunteers” is working for the former New York mayor.
"Oklahoma is very important for him, especially if he can do well in Florida (Tuesday),” Stone said.
Chad Alexander, one of the grassroots coordinators for GOP presidential contender John McCain, said momentum is picking up in the state for the U.S. senator from Arizona. Volunteers are calling every night and efforts are under way to make sure McCain's supporters get out to vote, he said.
"This state is shaping up very well for John McCain,” he said.
Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma chairman for Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee, said the former Arkansas governor is doing well in Oklahoma. Rallies are scheduled across the state for Huckabee, he said.
"Super Tuesday could be a wonderful day for him, and Oklahoma's a big part of that,” Pruitt said.
Kirk Shelley, Oklahoma state coordinator for GOP presidential contender Ron Paul, said about 800 volunteers are working in Oklahoma. The campaign has a telephone center in Tulsa and a headquarters in Oklahoma City for the Texas congressman, Shelley said.
Thad Balkman, volunteer Oklahoma state coordinator for Republican presidential contender Mitt Romney, said support for his candidate is growing.
"I'm getting a lot of phone calls and e-mails every day from people around the state that are watching the debates and reading the stuff on the Internet,” he said.
Gov. Henry keeps his options openGov. Brad Henry isn't vying to be the running mate for any of the Democratic presidential contenders. But he said he would consider the possibility if asked.
"That's crazy speculation,” he said of his being considered for vice president. "If anybody were asked to serve in a president's administration, you would have to give it serious consideration.
"I am really happy right here in Oklahoma doing what I'm doing, and I just have no desire to go to Washington, D.C.,” Henry said. "I plan to stay right here.”
Henry, who won two-thirds of the vote in his 2006 re-election, remains popular in the state and has shown that he can work with leaders from the Republican Party. The message of bipartisanship is a popular theme among most presidential candidates as the sense many voters are tired of the bickering on Capitol Hill brought about mainly by partisan politics.
Henry, who will serve as an Oklahoma delegate at the Democratic National Convention, isn't planning to endorse any Democratic presidential candidate before the Feb. 5 state primary or the Democratic National Convention in August.
"At this point, I think it's smart not to get committed to a particular candidate,” Henry said. "Ultimately, I will support the Democratic nominee for president, but it puts Oklahoma in a good position to have a little bit of influence down the line because we haven't already committed and already haven't written everybody else off.”
The governor said he is undecided.
"I don't know exactly who I'm supporting for president,” Henry said. "Ill figure that out hopefully and I will cast my vote Feb. 5.”
Michael McNutt, Capitol Bureau
Friday, January 25, 2008
Is John McCain Mama saying Chad Alexander and Trebor Worthen are NOT Republican ?
Chad Alexander and
Trebor Worthen
are the Oklahoma Campaign
Coordinators for McCain
Trebor Worthen
are the Oklahoma Campaign
Coordinators for McCain
For more background click here
Mama McCain:
Son Has No Support From Base
Son Has No Support From Base
Q: How much support do you think he has among the base of the Republican Party?
Roberta McCain: “I don’t think he has any. I don’t know what the base of the Repub–maybe I don’t know enough about it, but I’ve not seen any help whatsoever.”
Read her full eye-popping quotes here
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
John McCain's 2008 Campaign Announces Oklahoma Coordinators
ARLINGTON, VA -- U.S. Senator John McCain's presidential campaign today announced new additions to its Oklahoma Leadership Team. Chad Alexander and State Representative Trebor Worthen will lead the growing grassroots organization on behalf of John McCain’s candidacy leading up to Oklahoma’s February 5th Primary. Alexander and Worthen join State Chairman, Oklahoma Senator Tom Coburn and Honorary State Chairman, Oklahoma Governor Frank Keating.
"There is no greater champion of fiscal responsibility and government reform than John McCain,” said Alexander. "John McCain's conservative convictions and principled leadership are what our nation needs right now, and that’s why I am proud to back him for the Republican nomination.”
“I am honored to work for a man like Senator McCain whose integrity and character is unmatched. Oklahomans, like all Americans, will choose a President who has the experience to lead on day one, and John McCain is that man,” said Representative Worthen.
Senator John McCain spoke to his appreciation for his Oklahoma team. "I am pleased to have the backing and support of these veteran Republican leaders. My campaign will benefit from their hard work and energy as we work towards a victory in Oklahoma.”
Chad Alexander previously worked to elect J.C. Watts, Jr. as the first African American to serve in Congress from Oklahoma. After managing the re-elections of Congressman Watts, Alexander was elected chairman and executive director of the Oklahoma Republican Party.
Representative Trebor Worthen was elected in 2004 to the Oklahoma legislature as its youngest member. He previously served as political director of the Oklahoma Republican Party. Worthen currently serves as chairman of the House Taxpayer Protection Caucus and chairman of the House Elections and Redistricting committee.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
www.apexchange.com/(X(1)A(LmILmn8GyAEkAAAAZWZiMjA2YmMtMTQzNC00NzcyLThlOWYtMDhjYTM2ZDIyMTBjaCO_VhVxuVhLMr1Vauj0dzwcoLQ1))/pages/oneup_rss.aspx?id=47a839321c0c48e5960a0349f899bb1e%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20%20&links=USABL&uh=ZlmexWy8QrhLhjGcJKC%2FyGpHx15SqKbrpeGqusGoNm4%3D&AspxAutoDetectCookieSupport=1
Young speaker embroiled in ethics controversy again
By RON JENKINS
Release Date: 09/30/2007 04:00 AM
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) _ For the second time in his first year as speaker, Republican Lance Cargill has become embroiled in a controversy over fundraising.
Earlier this year, Cargill drew criticism for summoning lobbyists to a political consultant's office to personally ask them for donations.
Democrats charged that was symbolic of a "pay-for-play" atmosphere at the Capitol, where special interests who have legislation pending before the Legislature are pressured to make political donations.
Cargill, 36, said there was nothing improper about the solicitations.
The latest fundraising questions stem from activities in 2004 by the House Republican political action committee, which was headed by Cargill.
Those activities are being investigated by the Ethics Commission, according to party leaders.
The exact nature of the investigation is not clear, but it has exposed differences among GOP officials over how campaign funds should be handled.
One question being asked is how checks written to the Oklahoma Republican Party in 2004 wound up in the "Victory Fund" of the Oklahoma County Republican Committee.
As head of the House PAC, Cargill should have the answers, says former Speaker Todd Hiett, R-Kellyville. He and others said checks they wrote were intended for the Oklahoma Republican Party, not the county. Others said they had no problem with the county getting the funds.
For his part, Cargill is not responding to questions about the House PAC's fundraising and spending.
He has issued a statement in which he declared: "We are not aware of any ethics violations that have occurred, but to be absolutely clear: I did not solicit, receive, deposit or expend any Victory Fund checks."
State ethics rules limit contributions to a political party to $5,000, whether the money is received by the state party, the county party or similar entity.
Some of Cargill's supporters say that means checks made out to the state party can be given to the county.
Gary Jones, state Republican chairman, disagrees.
Jones says the state party should have received checks written to it in 2004. He said he did not know why funds were diverted.
"You will have to ask the people who directed that," Jones said. "Every dollar we received here was deposited and reported.
"If we chose to give money to another group or candidate, we wrote a check and reported that as well. I'm a stickler for the rules."
State ethics rules seek to prevent efforts to get around the $5,000 limit on contributions. State campaign laws do the same.
Violation of funding limits can lead to criminal charges. The most notable example was the case against former Gov. David Walters, who was accused of perjury for signing faulty campaign reports.
In the end, he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, paid a $1,000 fine and got a one-year deferred sentence. The controversy led to him not seeking re-election in 1994.
In a case brought against Oklahoma County Commissioner Brent Rinehart, the county official was charged with perjury, money laundering and conspiracy linked to an alleged scheme to exceed the $5,000 limit.
Those charges revolved around an accusation that Rinehart skirted campaign law by "knowingly accepting a contribution to a political candidate through an intermediary or conduit with unlawful intent."
The criminal charge is similar to a state ethics rule. Ethics rules carry only civil penalties, such as a fine, but a case can be forwarded to prosecutors for consideration of criminal charges.
The downfall of former Insurance Commissioner Carroll Fisher began with an Ethics Commission probe. The panel turned its files over to the state's multicounty grand jury. That led to bribery and other charges being levied against Fisher, who was impeached and sentenced to prison.
Both Jones and Pam Pollard, chairman of the Oklahoma County GOP, said they understood the Ethics Commission had sent letters asking some Oklahoma County Republicans to appear before the panel, but they did not know who got the letters.
Al Mertens of Oklahoma City, an unsuccessful candidate for the state House in 2000, was county GOP chairman in 2004.
He has not returned repeated calls to his home seeking comment.
Neither has Aaron Curry, a House Republican PAC official four years ago.
Ryan Wilson, Oklahoma City lawyer, performed legal services for the House PAC in 2004. He said he worked with Mertens and Curry. He said he was recommended for the work by Cargill.
Wilson said he sent bills to Cargill's law office in Harrah because he was acquainted with the House member.
"I was simply forwarding the bills (to Cargill's office) so that he could forward them on to the organization," the attorney said.
So far, no one has publicly alleged wrongdoing by Cargill or anyone else and the ethics investigation appears to be in its early stages.
Outcomes of Ethics Commission probes are not always made public. Ethics rules provide for a "private reprimand" in some cases.
Young speaker embroiled in ethics controversy again
By RON JENKINS
Release Date: 09/30/2007 04:00 AM
OKLAHOMA CITY (AP) _ For the second time in his first year as speaker, Republican Lance Cargill has become embroiled in a controversy over fundraising.
Earlier this year, Cargill drew criticism for summoning lobbyists to a political consultant's office to personally ask them for donations.
Democrats charged that was symbolic of a "pay-for-play" atmosphere at the Capitol, where special interests who have legislation pending before the Legislature are pressured to make political donations.
Cargill, 36, said there was nothing improper about the solicitations.
The latest fundraising questions stem from activities in 2004 by the House Republican political action committee, which was headed by Cargill.
Those activities are being investigated by the Ethics Commission, according to party leaders.
The exact nature of the investigation is not clear, but it has exposed differences among GOP officials over how campaign funds should be handled.
One question being asked is how checks written to the Oklahoma Republican Party in 2004 wound up in the "Victory Fund" of the Oklahoma County Republican Committee.
As head of the House PAC, Cargill should have the answers, says former Speaker Todd Hiett, R-Kellyville. He and others said checks they wrote were intended for the Oklahoma Republican Party, not the county. Others said they had no problem with the county getting the funds.
For his part, Cargill is not responding to questions about the House PAC's fundraising and spending.
He has issued a statement in which he declared: "We are not aware of any ethics violations that have occurred, but to be absolutely clear: I did not solicit, receive, deposit or expend any Victory Fund checks."
State ethics rules limit contributions to a political party to $5,000, whether the money is received by the state party, the county party or similar entity.
Some of Cargill's supporters say that means checks made out to the state party can be given to the county.
Gary Jones, state Republican chairman, disagrees.
Jones says the state party should have received checks written to it in 2004. He said he did not know why funds were diverted.
"You will have to ask the people who directed that," Jones said. "Every dollar we received here was deposited and reported.
"If we chose to give money to another group or candidate, we wrote a check and reported that as well. I'm a stickler for the rules."
State ethics rules seek to prevent efforts to get around the $5,000 limit on contributions. State campaign laws do the same.
Violation of funding limits can lead to criminal charges. The most notable example was the case against former Gov. David Walters, who was accused of perjury for signing faulty campaign reports.
In the end, he pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor, paid a $1,000 fine and got a one-year deferred sentence. The controversy led to him not seeking re-election in 1994.
In a case brought against Oklahoma County Commissioner Brent Rinehart, the county official was charged with perjury, money laundering and conspiracy linked to an alleged scheme to exceed the $5,000 limit.
Those charges revolved around an accusation that Rinehart skirted campaign law by "knowingly accepting a contribution to a political candidate through an intermediary or conduit with unlawful intent."
The criminal charge is similar to a state ethics rule. Ethics rules carry only civil penalties, such as a fine, but a case can be forwarded to prosecutors for consideration of criminal charges.
The downfall of former Insurance Commissioner Carroll Fisher began with an Ethics Commission probe. The panel turned its files over to the state's multicounty grand jury. That led to bribery and other charges being levied against Fisher, who was impeached and sentenced to prison.
Both Jones and Pam Pollard, chairman of the Oklahoma County GOP, said they understood the Ethics Commission had sent letters asking some Oklahoma County Republicans to appear before the panel, but they did not know who got the letters.
Al Mertens of Oklahoma City, an unsuccessful candidate for the state House in 2000, was county GOP chairman in 2004.
He has not returned repeated calls to his home seeking comment.
Neither has Aaron Curry, a House Republican PAC official four years ago.
Ryan Wilson, Oklahoma City lawyer, performed legal services for the House PAC in 2004. He said he worked with Mertens and Curry. He said he was recommended for the work by Cargill.
Wilson said he sent bills to Cargill's law office in Harrah because he was acquainted with the House member.
"I was simply forwarding the bills (to Cargill's office) so that he could forward them on to the organization," the attorney said.
So far, no one has publicly alleged wrongdoing by Cargill or anyone else and the ethics investigation appears to be in its early stages.
Outcomes of Ethics Commission probes are not always made public. Ethics rules provide for a "private reprimand" in some cases.
http://stevefair.blogspot.com/2007/10/are-political-consultants-hurting-or.html
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Are Political Consultants Hurting
or Helping Democracy?
Who They Are, How They Evaluate the
Process of Electing Candidates &
What They Reveal about Their Ethical Practices
In June of 1999, American University commissioned a study on the effect of paid political consultants on the Democratic process. The 28 page report is available at the link below. Some of their findings include-
Consultants see themselves as replacing political parties in providing strategic advice, advertising, polling, direct mail, opposition research, fundraising, and get out the vote operations.
Seventy-three percent of the consultants think unethical practices sometimes occur in their business.
While ideology is still what motivates consultants most often today, the number who say the money involved is their main motivation has more than doubled (11% to 24%).
I believe in the free market. I have sold everything from cat litter to apple butter, so I understand the free market. I would never attempt to prevent anyone from selling anything that is legal to a potential buyer, however political consultants tend to push talented volunteers out of the decision making process in campaigns. That happens for one reason- MONEY. If a campaign volunteer can provide FREE or VALUE PRICED material, labor or expertise, the consultant doesn't get their cut. The reason parties have become irrelevant in recent years is not because the level of talent at the volunteer level has deteriorated, but because consultants can't compete with free or cheap labor, so they attack it. They convince the naive candidate that without their "expert" help, they don't have a chance to win. Truth is- candidates win races, not consultants. A good solid candidate is the primary component to winning- one that will work, raise money, and engage voters. The consultant may help with material and "strategy", but the bulk of what they sell the candidate is MATERIAL, not strategy. The more material they can get a candidate to buy, the more they make. I understand that concept. I eat what I kill- I'm on commission.
Political consultants have become so prevalent in campaigns that now school board, county and municipal candidates use them. A principled consultant can provide expert knowledge of the campaign game, but an unprincipled one can spoil the whole barrel. It's critical principled consultants root out, expose and police their ranks, otherwise the vocation of political consultant will have the same respect level as a used car salesman or trial lawyer. I apologize for the rant, but when a candidate has 8 mail pieces in the last week of a race JUST TO SPEND THE MONEY SO THE CONSULTANT CAN GET HIS CUT, it hacks me off! Check out the link- the article is well worth reading.
http://spa.american.edu/ccps/getpdf.php?table=publications&ID=7
Posted by Steve Fair
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Are Political Consultants Hurting
or Helping Democracy?
Who They Are, How They Evaluate the
Process of Electing Candidates &
What They Reveal about Their Ethical Practices
In June of 1999, American University commissioned a study on the effect of paid political consultants on the Democratic process. The 28 page report is available at the link below. Some of their findings include-
Consultants see themselves as replacing political parties in providing strategic advice, advertising, polling, direct mail, opposition research, fundraising, and get out the vote operations.
Seventy-three percent of the consultants think unethical practices sometimes occur in their business.
While ideology is still what motivates consultants most often today, the number who say the money involved is their main motivation has more than doubled (11% to 24%).
I believe in the free market. I have sold everything from cat litter to apple butter, so I understand the free market. I would never attempt to prevent anyone from selling anything that is legal to a potential buyer, however political consultants tend to push talented volunteers out of the decision making process in campaigns. That happens for one reason- MONEY. If a campaign volunteer can provide FREE or VALUE PRICED material, labor or expertise, the consultant doesn't get their cut. The reason parties have become irrelevant in recent years is not because the level of talent at the volunteer level has deteriorated, but because consultants can't compete with free or cheap labor, so they attack it. They convince the naive candidate that without their "expert" help, they don't have a chance to win. Truth is- candidates win races, not consultants. A good solid candidate is the primary component to winning- one that will work, raise money, and engage voters. The consultant may help with material and "strategy", but the bulk of what they sell the candidate is MATERIAL, not strategy. The more material they can get a candidate to buy, the more they make. I understand that concept. I eat what I kill- I'm on commission.
Political consultants have become so prevalent in campaigns that now school board, county and municipal candidates use them. A principled consultant can provide expert knowledge of the campaign game, but an unprincipled one can spoil the whole barrel. It's critical principled consultants root out, expose and police their ranks, otherwise the vocation of political consultant will have the same respect level as a used car salesman or trial lawyer. I apologize for the rant, but when a candidate has 8 mail pieces in the last week of a race JUST TO SPEND THE MONEY SO THE CONSULTANT CAN GET HIS CUT, it hacks me off! Check out the link- the article is well worth reading.
http://spa.american.edu/ccps/getpdf.php?table=publications&ID=7
Posted by Steve Fair
Sunday, September 30, 2007
http://newsok.com/article/3136503/1191110866
Sun September 30, 2007
Cleaning up: Another crack at campaign reform
The Oklahoman Editorial
Republican state Rep. David Dank has chosen to take the lead on the issue of ethics reform, particularly as it pertains to campaign financing. It's a laudable goal, although generally the more rules that are enacted, the messier and more complicated it gets for everyone involved.
We've seen this on the national stage, where post-Watergate campaign finance reform muddied already murky waters and helped lead to the McCain-Feingold reform of recent years, which in turn has created yet another level of confusion and any number of ingenious efforts to bend or skirt the rules.
Dank, R-Oklahoma City, aims to build on modest ethics reform passed during the 2007 session. He has some sound ideas in his proposed legislation, among them a ban on accepting campaign contributions during the session (and during the 15 days before and after the session) and ending the practice of transferring money from one political fundraising committee to another.
The former would apply not just to incumbents but to candidates, which legislators may find more palatable than previous efforts aimed solely at incumbents. Those, they argued, would have put incumbents at a disadvantage, which is ridiculous. The power of the incumbency is immeasurable, for one thing. For another, candidates aren't in a position to vote on legislation — incumbents are, and we're for ways to eliminate the "pay for play” mind-set that's been all too prevalent through the years.
The Oklahoma Clean Campaign Act of 2008 also would:
•Tighten the definition of a "person” making a campaign contribution, to eliminate loopholes used by some companies and other organizations.
•Require detailed listing of all campaign expenditures on regular reports filed with the state Ethics Commission.
•Prohibit the use of campaign funds raised to run for one office in seeking another office.
•Prohibit the use of surplus campaign funds for personal purposes or donation to another candidate.
We're less enthusiastic about Dank's proposal to place a $40,000 limit on contributions by any person, lobbyist or family. That's sure to sit well with the public, but why that amount? Why not $20,000, or $50,000? This and his call to limit campaign contributions to campaign expenses, as opposed to such items as computers, travel expenses and food and lodging, seem an administrative nightmare waiting to happen.
That nightmare would likely fall to the Ethics Commission, which already is overworked and undermanned as it tries to keep pace with the myriad rules regarding public officials. Until something is done by the Legislature to fix that problem, and the commission is given the teeth to dissuade bad behavior, then Dank's wish to give Oklahomans "a clean campaign finance system” is likely to remain just that.
Sun September 30, 2007
Cleaning up: Another crack at campaign reform
The Oklahoman Editorial
Republican state Rep. David Dank has chosen to take the lead on the issue of ethics reform, particularly as it pertains to campaign financing. It's a laudable goal, although generally the more rules that are enacted, the messier and more complicated it gets for everyone involved.
We've seen this on the national stage, where post-Watergate campaign finance reform muddied already murky waters and helped lead to the McCain-Feingold reform of recent years, which in turn has created yet another level of confusion and any number of ingenious efforts to bend or skirt the rules.
Dank, R-Oklahoma City, aims to build on modest ethics reform passed during the 2007 session. He has some sound ideas in his proposed legislation, among them a ban on accepting campaign contributions during the session (and during the 15 days before and after the session) and ending the practice of transferring money from one political fundraising committee to another.
The former would apply not just to incumbents but to candidates, which legislators may find more palatable than previous efforts aimed solely at incumbents. Those, they argued, would have put incumbents at a disadvantage, which is ridiculous. The power of the incumbency is immeasurable, for one thing. For another, candidates aren't in a position to vote on legislation — incumbents are, and we're for ways to eliminate the "pay for play” mind-set that's been all too prevalent through the years.
The Oklahoma Clean Campaign Act of 2008 also would:
•Tighten the definition of a "person” making a campaign contribution, to eliminate loopholes used by some companies and other organizations.
•Require detailed listing of all campaign expenditures on regular reports filed with the state Ethics Commission.
•Prohibit the use of campaign funds raised to run for one office in seeking another office.
•Prohibit the use of surplus campaign funds for personal purposes or donation to another candidate.
We're less enthusiastic about Dank's proposal to place a $40,000 limit on contributions by any person, lobbyist or family. That's sure to sit well with the public, but why that amount? Why not $20,000, or $50,000? This and his call to limit campaign contributions to campaign expenses, as opposed to such items as computers, travel expenses and food and lodging, seem an administrative nightmare waiting to happen.
That nightmare would likely fall to the Ethics Commission, which already is overworked and undermanned as it tries to keep pace with the myriad rules regarding public officials. Until something is done by the Legislature to fix that problem, and the commission is given the teeth to dissuade bad behavior, then Dank's wish to give Oklahomans "a clean campaign finance system” is likely to remain just that.
http://newsok.com/article/3134081/1190770299
Wed September 26, 2007
Check that: Probe of campaign funds troubling
The Oklahoman Editorial
House Speaker Lance Cargill, who has spent the year soliciting the 100 best ideas for Oklahoma, may wish to add one to his list: Produce an explanation for Republican campaign accounts that appear out of whack, and pronto.
Cargill, R-Harrah, is a party in an investigation by the state Ethics Commission into several 2004 campaign checks that were written to the state Republican Party but instead wound up in the account of the Oklahoma County Republican Committee.
Among those surprised by this turn of events was Cargill's predecessor, former Speaker Todd Hiett, who says he thought his own $5,000 contribution was going to the state. "I delegated campaign finance to Lance Cargill as the (political action committee) chairman,” Hiett told The Oklahoman' s Jennifer Mock. At the time, Cargill was honorary chairman of the House fundraising committee.
Mock reported that a dozen checks from the 2004 election cycle, totaling more than $30,000, are the focus of the investigation. Many who wrote the checks said their contributions went to the county party without them knowing it. Others said that in writing a check to the state GOP, they didn't earmark or even care where the money went, provided it helped Republican candidates.
Five House Republicans produced a statement — issued through Cargill's office — defending their boss. They said Cargill in 2004 didn't ask for the funds and that none of them told the GOP how their donations were to be spent. Cargill says he's glad to cooperate with the Ethics Commission, has denied any wrongdoing and adds that the probe stems from gripes by "political opponents.”
That may be, but having money that's intended for one campaign account turn up in another at the very least emits an unpleasant odor. And to be sure, these sorts of things rarely go over well in the court of public opinion.
Wed September 26, 2007
Check that: Probe of campaign funds troubling
The Oklahoman Editorial
House Speaker Lance Cargill, who has spent the year soliciting the 100 best ideas for Oklahoma, may wish to add one to his list: Produce an explanation for Republican campaign accounts that appear out of whack, and pronto.
Cargill, R-Harrah, is a party in an investigation by the state Ethics Commission into several 2004 campaign checks that were written to the state Republican Party but instead wound up in the account of the Oklahoma County Republican Committee.
Among those surprised by this turn of events was Cargill's predecessor, former Speaker Todd Hiett, who says he thought his own $5,000 contribution was going to the state. "I delegated campaign finance to Lance Cargill as the (political action committee) chairman,” Hiett told The Oklahoman' s Jennifer Mock. At the time, Cargill was honorary chairman of the House fundraising committee.
Mock reported that a dozen checks from the 2004 election cycle, totaling more than $30,000, are the focus of the investigation. Many who wrote the checks said their contributions went to the county party without them knowing it. Others said that in writing a check to the state GOP, they didn't earmark or even care where the money went, provided it helped Republican candidates.
Five House Republicans produced a statement — issued through Cargill's office — defending their boss. They said Cargill in 2004 didn't ask for the funds and that none of them told the GOP how their donations were to be spent. Cargill says he's glad to cooperate with the Ethics Commission, has denied any wrongdoing and adds that the probe stems from gripes by "political opponents.”
That may be, but having money that's intended for one campaign account turn up in another at the very least emits an unpleasant odor. And to be sure, these sorts of things rarely go over well in the court of public opinion.
http://newsok.com/article/3136646/1191113300
Sun September 30, 2007
Staff shortage may delay ethics investigations
By Michael McNutt
Capitol Bureau
Lack of adequate staffing at the Oklahoma Ethics Commission makes it a certainty that an investigation into Republican House fundraising tactics in 2004 will take weeks to complete.
The commission only has one attorney to interpret commission rules and state law and only one investigator to look into complaints.
Both have to work additional hours to look into ethics complaints, said Marilyn Hughes, the commission's executive director.
The commission has seven employees; a new position has not been added since 1991.
The agency takes care of candidate campaign reports, lobbyist reports, financial disclosure statements, political action committee reports and registrations.
Hughes, the commission's executive director the past 20 years, said requests for additional funding typically are turned down by legislators — the same people the commission scrutinizes.
Staff funding sought
Despite record state budgets each of the past three years, no additional money for staffing has been approved.
"We've been asking for increased staff for the last 15 years,” Hughes said.
The commission will ask legislators next year to add three staff members, including another lawyer and investigator.
Rep. David Dank, who last week said he will file an ethics bill next legislative session to tighten campaign financing, said the agency needs more money and more teeth.
"They need to be funded properly, and the ethics laws need to be strengthened,” said Dank, R-Oklahoma City. "They need to have more investigators on their staff. Right now all they can do is shuffle (campaign reporting) papers, keep up with the paperwork. They don't even have time to investigate anything.”
Permanent funding
It may be time to consider finding a permanent funding source for the agency and to take it out of the legislative process, Dank said.
He started working on his ethics ideas in late May, shortly after this year's session adjourned.
"It's ridiculous what we've done with the Ethics Commission,” he said. "I just think it's important that we have an Ethics Commission that's functional.”
Rules prohibit any Ethics Commission member or employee from talking about investigations, who files complaints or whether complaints have been filed.
Secrecy surrounding investigations is important, Hughes said.
Numerous complaints have been filed in the past two decades that had no foundation.
"We're dealing with politics, and in politics you can ruin someone with unfounded allegations,” she said. "You don't have any confidentiality — then the commission can be used as a political tool.”
Sun September 30, 2007
Staff shortage may delay ethics investigations
By Michael McNutt
Capitol Bureau
Lack of adequate staffing at the Oklahoma Ethics Commission makes it a certainty that an investigation into Republican House fundraising tactics in 2004 will take weeks to complete.
The commission only has one attorney to interpret commission rules and state law and only one investigator to look into complaints.
Both have to work additional hours to look into ethics complaints, said Marilyn Hughes, the commission's executive director.
The commission has seven employees; a new position has not been added since 1991.
The agency takes care of candidate campaign reports, lobbyist reports, financial disclosure statements, political action committee reports and registrations.
Hughes, the commission's executive director the past 20 years, said requests for additional funding typically are turned down by legislators — the same people the commission scrutinizes.
Staff funding sought
Despite record state budgets each of the past three years, no additional money for staffing has been approved.
"We've been asking for increased staff for the last 15 years,” Hughes said.
The commission will ask legislators next year to add three staff members, including another lawyer and investigator.
Rep. David Dank, who last week said he will file an ethics bill next legislative session to tighten campaign financing, said the agency needs more money and more teeth.
"They need to be funded properly, and the ethics laws need to be strengthened,” said Dank, R-Oklahoma City. "They need to have more investigators on their staff. Right now all they can do is shuffle (campaign reporting) papers, keep up with the paperwork. They don't even have time to investigate anything.”
Permanent funding
It may be time to consider finding a permanent funding source for the agency and to take it out of the legislative process, Dank said.
He started working on his ethics ideas in late May, shortly after this year's session adjourned.
"It's ridiculous what we've done with the Ethics Commission,” he said. "I just think it's important that we have an Ethics Commission that's functional.”
Rules prohibit any Ethics Commission member or employee from talking about investigations, who files complaints or whether complaints have been filed.
Secrecy surrounding investigations is important, Hughes said.
Numerous complaints have been filed in the past two decades that had no foundation.
"We're dealing with politics, and in politics you can ruin someone with unfounded allegations,” she said. "You don't have any confidentiality — then the commission can be used as a political tool.”
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?articleID=070930_1_A21_hTheO11725
GOP funds under question
By MICK HINTON World Capitol Bureau
9/30/2007
The Oklahoma County Republican Party received money meant for the state party.
OKLAHOMA CITY — Key Republicans intent on taking over the state House of Representatives in 2004 found a way to capture tens of thousands of dollars not intended for their use, according to documents obtained by the Tulsa World.
The bulk of the money came from legislators who thought it was going to the state Republican Party. Unbeknownst to some of these lawmakers, the money was diverted to the Oklahoma County Republican Party’s coffers, where the House PAC gained access to spend it for key races across the state.
Legislators are prohibited by state law from making contributions directly to the House Republican’s political action committee.
Whether the PAC’s actions under the leadership of chairman Lance Cargill were illegal apparently is being sorted out by the Oklahoma Ethics Commission.
Cargill, who is now speaker of the House, remains silent on questions about what kind of arrangements the PAC had with Oklahoma County Republicans, sticking to a statement he made on Sept. 20.
Asked to comment on questions about the diverted money, Cargill issued a statement saying, “I did not solicit, receive, deposit or expend any Victory Fund checks.”
Although the Victory Fund is not an actual entity, it is the term used by Republicans to refer to any party money raised for campaigns.
Checks to state party: Documents show that former House Speaker Todd Hiett and eight other lawmakers wrote checks to the state party, but the money ended up with the Oklahoma County Republican Party.
In all, House members put up a total of $48,000 that ended up at the disposal of the Oklahoma County party.
Hiett has said that Cargill, chairman of of the House PAC in 2004, should be able to explain how the state party’s money ended up with the county party.
Republicans took notice when GOP stalwart Ray Vaughn, a former state representative who is now an Oklahoma County commissioner, declared he was not pleased that his check was diverted. Vaughn said he remembers sending the check to the State Party Headquarters at 4031 North Lincoln Blvd. The Oklahoma County Republican Party rents space from the state party at the same address.
Rep. Susan Winchester, RChickasha, said there was no way that she would have donated money to Oklahoma County, rather than giving it to Grady County where she lives.
Paying for polling: Documents obtained by the World indicate that the PAC headed by Cargill had a role in directing the funds to specific candidates involved in tough races.
According to invoices presented by pollsters to the Oklahoma County Republicans, the PAC had a role in getting the county to foot the bill.
According to an invoice dated Oct. 29, 2004, pollster Bill Shapard conducted six surveys of key House races, all outside Oklahoma County.
Shapard sent the bill to the Oklahoma County party, and the party paid the bill.
A notation on the invoice states that Aaron Currey, then executive director of the House PAC, “instructed” Shapard’s firm to send the bill over to the Oklahoma County Republican Party. Currey could not be reached for comment. Shapard confirmed the polls were conducted for the Republican House PAC.
A notation on another invoice obtained by the World indicates that polling done by Cole Hargrave Snodgrass and Associates at a cost of $15,050 was paid jointly, with the House PAC footing the bill for $5,000 and the Oklahoma County party picking up the rest.
Fount Holland, the House Republican PAC’s primary consultant, also served as a paid consultant to individual candidates.
Several of the lawmakers contacted said they did not know the House PAC polling of their races was being conducted, even though Holland was consulting for their campaigns.
Holland said there was no law preventing him from serving as a consultant for both the Republican House PAC and individual candidates. He said he did not use information resulting from the House PAC polling when he was advising individual candidates. If the PAC information was used to the benefit of a candidate, it would have to be reported as an in-kind contribution, Holland said.
Over the limit: Questions have arisen on whether some candidates benefited from contributions exceeding the $5,000 limit. Records filed in 2004 by the Republican House PAC failed to delineate how much the PAC actually was giving to specific candidates, as required by ethics rules.
The only notation was “candidate contribution - campaign.” When the World pointed out this lack of information, the House PAC filed an amended report shortly after noon Friday, which was three years after the expenditures had been made.
The revised record showed that Republican incumbent Stuart Ericson received a $4,000 contribution from the House PAC. In addition, Cole Hargrave conducted a poll in his race, costing another $2,450, while Shapard’s firm conducted a survey in that race costing $500.
Ericson lost the race. However, Republicans were successful in capturing command of the House for the first time since the 1920s, when they held it for only a short time.
Another lawmaker, Rep. Tad Jones, R-Claremore, received $4,000 from the House PAC. In addition, two polls — one costing $2,450 and another costing $500 — were conducted on his behalf.
Possible Ethics Commission probe: State Republican Party Chairman Gary Jones confirmed in mid-September that the party’s attorney had informed him that the state Ethics Commission was asking some Republicans to appear, although he did not know their names.
However, the state Ethics Commission refuses to comment on whether it is investigating. Marilyn Hughes, executive director of the Ethics Commission, also declined to discuss whether the House Republican PAC could legally direct Oklahoma County to pay its bills.
Meeting behind closed doors to decide whether ethics rules have been broken, the commission has the choice of issuing a private reprimand, a public reprimand, calling for a civil fine or doing nothing.
A state law prohibits “a campaign contribution to be made to a particular candidate or committee through an intermediary or conduit” to evade reporting requirements or exceed contribution limits.
Richard Morrissette, a Democratic representative and an attorney, said his interpretation would be that this law prohibits the PAC from directing the county to pay for polls conducted for the benefit of the political action committee.
“If the factual scenario is that the expense was done for the candidate under the direction of the PAC, that could be a criminal offense,” Morrissette said.
Willful violation of the Oklahoma statute could result in a felony conviction and fine up to four times the amount exceeding the contribution limit or imprisonment for up to a year, or both. If the contribution amount in question is less than $5,000, a willful violator could be found guilty of a misdemeanor.
Mick Hinton (405) 528-2465
mick.hinton@tulsaworld.com
By MICK HINTON World Capitol Bureau
Comments:
(1) readers have commented on this story so far. Tell us what you think below!
1. 9/30/2007 8:57:52 AM, David,
I dont understand the consultant Holland's comment ..Are we to believe that the knowledge which he gleaned from those polls paid for by the county party would not benefit his clients like Representative Ericson? These folks are running a shell game ...as evidenced by not even reporting who they are contributing to. At the least there is a foul oder coming from the Republicans in OKC. Speaker Cargill should resign.
GOP funds under question
By MICK HINTON World Capitol Bureau
9/30/2007
The Oklahoma County Republican Party received money meant for the state party.
OKLAHOMA CITY — Key Republicans intent on taking over the state House of Representatives in 2004 found a way to capture tens of thousands of dollars not intended for their use, according to documents obtained by the Tulsa World.
The bulk of the money came from legislators who thought it was going to the state Republican Party. Unbeknownst to some of these lawmakers, the money was diverted to the Oklahoma County Republican Party’s coffers, where the House PAC gained access to spend it for key races across the state.
Legislators are prohibited by state law from making contributions directly to the House Republican’s political action committee.
Whether the PAC’s actions under the leadership of chairman Lance Cargill were illegal apparently is being sorted out by the Oklahoma Ethics Commission.
Cargill, who is now speaker of the House, remains silent on questions about what kind of arrangements the PAC had with Oklahoma County Republicans, sticking to a statement he made on Sept. 20.
Asked to comment on questions about the diverted money, Cargill issued a statement saying, “I did not solicit, receive, deposit or expend any Victory Fund checks.”
Although the Victory Fund is not an actual entity, it is the term used by Republicans to refer to any party money raised for campaigns.
Checks to state party: Documents show that former House Speaker Todd Hiett and eight other lawmakers wrote checks to the state party, but the money ended up with the Oklahoma County Republican Party.
In all, House members put up a total of $48,000 that ended up at the disposal of the Oklahoma County party.
Hiett has said that Cargill, chairman of of the House PAC in 2004, should be able to explain how the state party’s money ended up with the county party.
Republicans took notice when GOP stalwart Ray Vaughn, a former state representative who is now an Oklahoma County commissioner, declared he was not pleased that his check was diverted. Vaughn said he remembers sending the check to the State Party Headquarters at 4031 North Lincoln Blvd. The Oklahoma County Republican Party rents space from the state party at the same address.
Rep. Susan Winchester, RChickasha, said there was no way that she would have donated money to Oklahoma County, rather than giving it to Grady County where she lives.
Paying for polling: Documents obtained by the World indicate that the PAC headed by Cargill had a role in directing the funds to specific candidates involved in tough races.
According to invoices presented by pollsters to the Oklahoma County Republicans, the PAC had a role in getting the county to foot the bill.
According to an invoice dated Oct. 29, 2004, pollster Bill Shapard conducted six surveys of key House races, all outside Oklahoma County.
Shapard sent the bill to the Oklahoma County party, and the party paid the bill.
A notation on the invoice states that Aaron Currey, then executive director of the House PAC, “instructed” Shapard’s firm to send the bill over to the Oklahoma County Republican Party. Currey could not be reached for comment. Shapard confirmed the polls were conducted for the Republican House PAC.
A notation on another invoice obtained by the World indicates that polling done by Cole Hargrave Snodgrass and Associates at a cost of $15,050 was paid jointly, with the House PAC footing the bill for $5,000 and the Oklahoma County party picking up the rest.
Fount Holland, the House Republican PAC’s primary consultant, also served as a paid consultant to individual candidates.
Several of the lawmakers contacted said they did not know the House PAC polling of their races was being conducted, even though Holland was consulting for their campaigns.
Holland said there was no law preventing him from serving as a consultant for both the Republican House PAC and individual candidates. He said he did not use information resulting from the House PAC polling when he was advising individual candidates. If the PAC information was used to the benefit of a candidate, it would have to be reported as an in-kind contribution, Holland said.
Over the limit: Questions have arisen on whether some candidates benefited from contributions exceeding the $5,000 limit. Records filed in 2004 by the Republican House PAC failed to delineate how much the PAC actually was giving to specific candidates, as required by ethics rules.
The only notation was “candidate contribution - campaign.” When the World pointed out this lack of information, the House PAC filed an amended report shortly after noon Friday, which was three years after the expenditures had been made.
The revised record showed that Republican incumbent Stuart Ericson received a $4,000 contribution from the House PAC. In addition, Cole Hargrave conducted a poll in his race, costing another $2,450, while Shapard’s firm conducted a survey in that race costing $500.
Ericson lost the race. However, Republicans were successful in capturing command of the House for the first time since the 1920s, when they held it for only a short time.
Another lawmaker, Rep. Tad Jones, R-Claremore, received $4,000 from the House PAC. In addition, two polls — one costing $2,450 and another costing $500 — were conducted on his behalf.
Possible Ethics Commission probe: State Republican Party Chairman Gary Jones confirmed in mid-September that the party’s attorney had informed him that the state Ethics Commission was asking some Republicans to appear, although he did not know their names.
However, the state Ethics Commission refuses to comment on whether it is investigating. Marilyn Hughes, executive director of the Ethics Commission, also declined to discuss whether the House Republican PAC could legally direct Oklahoma County to pay its bills.
Meeting behind closed doors to decide whether ethics rules have been broken, the commission has the choice of issuing a private reprimand, a public reprimand, calling for a civil fine or doing nothing.
A state law prohibits “a campaign contribution to be made to a particular candidate or committee through an intermediary or conduit” to evade reporting requirements or exceed contribution limits.
Richard Morrissette, a Democratic representative and an attorney, said his interpretation would be that this law prohibits the PAC from directing the county to pay for polls conducted for the benefit of the political action committee.
“If the factual scenario is that the expense was done for the candidate under the direction of the PAC, that could be a criminal offense,” Morrissette said.
Willful violation of the Oklahoma statute could result in a felony conviction and fine up to four times the amount exceeding the contribution limit or imprisonment for up to a year, or both. If the contribution amount in question is less than $5,000, a willful violator could be found guilty of a misdemeanor.
Mick Hinton (405) 528-2465
mick.hinton@tulsaworld.com
By MICK HINTON World Capitol Bureau
Comments:
(1) readers have commented on this story so far. Tell us what you think below!
1. 9/30/2007 8:57:52 AM, David,
I dont understand the consultant Holland's comment ..Are we to believe that the knowledge which he gleaned from those polls paid for by the county party would not benefit his clients like Representative Ericson? These folks are running a shell game ...as evidenced by not even reporting who they are contributing to. At the least there is a foul oder coming from the Republicans in OKC. Speaker Cargill should resign.
http://www.okgazette.com/p/12776/a/1068/Default.aspx?ReturnUrl=LwBEAGUAZgBhAHUAbAB0AC4AYQBzAHAAeAAslashAHAAPQAxADIANwAyADkA
Documents reveal state GOP work billed to county party
Monday, September 24, 2007
By Scott Cooper
The Oklahoma County Republican Party, under investigation for questionable 2004 campaign contributions, was billed thousands of dollars for candidates in districts well outside of Oklahoma County during that election cycle.
In documents obtained by Oklahoma Gazette, various political and survey consulting firms conducted work for nine Republican state House candidates in the fall of 2004, none of whom ran for office inside Oklahoma County.
PAYMENTS
One firm sent a bill for $15,050 to the county party for survey work on six incumbent representatives. Another firm conducted six polls for various district races at a cost of $3,000.
The surveys were for races in the counties of:
• Cleveland,
• Texas,
• Pottawatomie,
• Rogers,
• Tulsa,
• Muskogee,
• Mayes,
• Wagoner and
• Murray.
Another invoice sent to the county party in 2004 totaling $1,705 went for “background research” and searches with the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, records show.
On one invoice, a memo is written on the cover of a fax to forward the attached invoices to the Oklahoma County Republican Party for payment. The fax was sent to the county party.
NO COMMENT
Pam Pollard, executive director of the county party, said she could not comment about the documents, which deal with the timeframe under investigation.
State Republican financing is being investigated by the Oklahoma Ethics Commission for contributions made out to the state Republican Party, but ending up in the county party coffers. Some of the donors, who were elected Republican House members, have publicly said they did not direct their contribution to the county party.
Look for more coverage in the Oct. 3 Oklahoma Gazette. —Scott Cooper
2 Comment(s):
Tip of the Iceberg?
Are we sure this money came from campaign funds or did it possibly come originate in the PAC funds that Todd Heitt and other leading republicans filled with "contributions" from lobbyists during the legislative sessions? I know for a fact that at least one Republican lobbyist made a phone call to a retired legislator complaining about the "new cost of doing business" during Scott Heitt's first term as Speaker.
9/25/2007 10:57 AM | Okiecrat
Um....
So, what was wrong with the Oklahoma County Republicans helping out the other counties?
9/25/2007 10:57 AM | stinkerpants
Documents reveal state GOP work billed to county party
Monday, September 24, 2007
By Scott Cooper
The Oklahoma County Republican Party, under investigation for questionable 2004 campaign contributions, was billed thousands of dollars for candidates in districts well outside of Oklahoma County during that election cycle.
In documents obtained by Oklahoma Gazette, various political and survey consulting firms conducted work for nine Republican state House candidates in the fall of 2004, none of whom ran for office inside Oklahoma County.
PAYMENTS
One firm sent a bill for $15,050 to the county party for survey work on six incumbent representatives. Another firm conducted six polls for various district races at a cost of $3,000.
The surveys were for races in the counties of:
• Cleveland,
• Texas,
• Pottawatomie,
• Rogers,
• Tulsa,
• Muskogee,
• Mayes,
• Wagoner and
• Murray.
Another invoice sent to the county party in 2004 totaling $1,705 went for “background research” and searches with the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, records show.
On one invoice, a memo is written on the cover of a fax to forward the attached invoices to the Oklahoma County Republican Party for payment. The fax was sent to the county party.
NO COMMENT
Pam Pollard, executive director of the county party, said she could not comment about the documents, which deal with the timeframe under investigation.
State Republican financing is being investigated by the Oklahoma Ethics Commission for contributions made out to the state Republican Party, but ending up in the county party coffers. Some of the donors, who were elected Republican House members, have publicly said they did not direct their contribution to the county party.
Look for more coverage in the Oct. 3 Oklahoma Gazette. —Scott Cooper
2 Comment(s):
Tip of the Iceberg?
Are we sure this money came from campaign funds or did it possibly come originate in the PAC funds that Todd Heitt and other leading republicans filled with "contributions" from lobbyists during the legislative sessions? I know for a fact that at least one Republican lobbyist made a phone call to a retired legislator complaining about the "new cost of doing business" during Scott Heitt's first term as Speaker.
9/25/2007 10:57 AM | Okiecrat
Um....
So, what was wrong with the Oklahoma County Republicans helping out the other counties?
9/25/2007 10:57 AM | stinkerpants
http://www.newsok.com/article/3131060/
Sat September 22, 2007
Ethics panel looks into GOP fundraising
By Jennifer Mock
Capitol Bureau
Twelve checks from the 2004 election cycle obtained by The Oklahoman on Friday are at the heart of an ongoing investigation by the state Ethics Commission into the fundraising practices of the House Republican leadership.
The checks — most of which are made out to the "Oklahoma Republican Party” and total more than $33,000 — ended up in the Oklahoma County Republican Committee's account. Many of the current and former House members cutting the checks say they thought the money was intended for the state party and went to the county party without their knowledge.
Others say it is common practice for lawmakers without a race in any given election year to write checks to the party to be distributed to candidates who need the money. By writing "Oklahoma Republican Party,” they did not indicate, or in many cases care, where the money went as long as the money got to financially needy GOP candidates, many said.
The Ethics Commission is barred from confirming if an investigation is occurring.
Pam Pollard, chairman of the Oklahoma County Republican Party, said she was barred from commenting because it is a "confidential manner before the Ethics Commission.”
Chairman confirms inquiry
State GOP Chairman Gary Jones confirmed Friday his attorney notified him letters had gone out to several party members about appearing before the Ethics Commission in connection with the investigation.
Jones said he did not know who received the letters. He was not asked to appear. He said he did not receive any of the $33,000 in 2004 and did not know the money was intended for the state Republican Party.
House Speaker Lance Cargill, who as honorary chairman of the Republican state House Committee at the time raised money for House campaigns, has denied wrongdoing, saying he "did not solicit, receive, deposit or expend” any of the checks in question.
What donors said
Six of the 11 lawmakers who wrote the 12 checks also said in a statement that Cargill did not solicit them for the funds and did not try to control how the money would be spent.
•The spokesman for former Rep. Ray Vaughn, who is now an Oklahoma County commissioner, said Vaughan's check was sent directly to Jones' office address. Rick Buchanan said he does not know how it ended up at the county party.
•Rep. John Trebilcock, R-Broken Arrow, said he wrote a check to the state party.
•Former Rep. Dale DeWitt said he wanted to help GOP candidates. He is not sure where the check ended up, but he knows it went to the candidates who needed it.
Sat September 22, 2007
Ethics panel looks into GOP fundraising
By Jennifer Mock
Capitol Bureau
Twelve checks from the 2004 election cycle obtained by The Oklahoman on Friday are at the heart of an ongoing investigation by the state Ethics Commission into the fundraising practices of the House Republican leadership.
The checks — most of which are made out to the "Oklahoma Republican Party” and total more than $33,000 — ended up in the Oklahoma County Republican Committee's account. Many of the current and former House members cutting the checks say they thought the money was intended for the state party and went to the county party without their knowledge.
Others say it is common practice for lawmakers without a race in any given election year to write checks to the party to be distributed to candidates who need the money. By writing "Oklahoma Republican Party,” they did not indicate, or in many cases care, where the money went as long as the money got to financially needy GOP candidates, many said.
The Ethics Commission is barred from confirming if an investigation is occurring.
Pam Pollard, chairman of the Oklahoma County Republican Party, said she was barred from commenting because it is a "confidential manner before the Ethics Commission.”
Chairman confirms inquiry
State GOP Chairman Gary Jones confirmed Friday his attorney notified him letters had gone out to several party members about appearing before the Ethics Commission in connection with the investigation.
Jones said he did not know who received the letters. He was not asked to appear. He said he did not receive any of the $33,000 in 2004 and did not know the money was intended for the state Republican Party.
House Speaker Lance Cargill, who as honorary chairman of the Republican state House Committee at the time raised money for House campaigns, has denied wrongdoing, saying he "did not solicit, receive, deposit or expend” any of the checks in question.
What donors said
Six of the 11 lawmakers who wrote the 12 checks also said in a statement that Cargill did not solicit them for the funds and did not try to control how the money would be spent.
•The spokesman for former Rep. Ray Vaughn, who is now an Oklahoma County commissioner, said Vaughan's check was sent directly to Jones' office address. Rick Buchanan said he does not know how it ended up at the county party.
•Rep. John Trebilcock, R-Broken Arrow, said he wrote a check to the state party.
•Former Rep. Dale DeWitt said he wanted to help GOP candidates. He is not sure where the check ended up, but he knows it went to the candidates who needed it.
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/O/OK_ETHICS_GOP_OKOL-?SITE=OKTUL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2007-09-21-10-15-15
Sep 22, 11:11 AM EDT
Worthen: Ethics panel has not asked him to appear
TULSA, Okla. (AP) -- The chairman of a state House political action committee that raises money to elect Republican candidates says he has not received a letter asking him to appear before the Oklahoma Ethics Commission.
Rep. Trebor Worthen, R-Oklahoma City, chairman of the House PAC, told the Tulsa World he called the Ethics Commission after it was reported he had been sent a letter to make sure that was not the case.
Gary Jones, chairman of the State Republican Party, said earlier this week the Ethics Commission is probing possible violations in GOP campaign financial dealings in 2004. Questions have been raised as to why contributions designated for the state party ended up with the Oklahoma County Republican Committee.
Jones said the party's attorney informed the party that "some people have received letters to appear" before the Ethics Commission, but Jones did not know who they were.
The commission will not confirm or deny whether it is conducting investigations.
Meanwhile, State House Democrats said Friday no one should rush to conclusions regarding the reports that House Republicans' campaign activities three years ago are being probed.
"Too often, politicians trip over each other rushing to judgment in these matters," said Rep. Danny Morgan, head of the House's minority party. "Right now, there are simply more questions than there are answers. We should patiently wait while the Ethics Commission investigators do their work."
On the other hand, Rep. Chuck Hoskin, the House Democrats' new caucus chairman, said the allegations appear to be serious, "involving Republicans at high levels of state government."
Questions have been raised as to why Republican candidates' contributions to the state party in 2004 were diverted to the Oklahoma County Republican Party, unbeknownst to some of the contributors.
Todd Hiett, then House speaker, said he did not know that the money intended for the state party ended up in the coffers of the Oklahoma County Republican Party. But he said Rep. Lance Cargill, who headed up the House Republican caucus, should be able to answer questions because he was responsible for the Republican PAC's activities.
Cargill, now House speaker, has not addressed the question as to why the money was moved.
Cargill, R-Harrah, released a statement Thursday saying, "We will play by the rules and work diligently to resolve any matter, and to show that unfounded claims that have been made are false."
The speaker said he did not "solicit, receive, deposit or expend any Victory Fund checks" contributed by candidates to the party.
Candidates can contribute money to parties but cannot designate how those contributions must be spent.
Meanwhile, another former lawmaker, Rep. Mark Liotta, R-Tulsa, said Friday he wrote a check to the state party for $5,000 at the time and was asked later by a staffer with the House PAC if it would be all right for the county party, instead of the state, to have the money.
Sep 22, 11:11 AM EDT
Worthen: Ethics panel has not asked him to appear
TULSA, Okla. (AP) -- The chairman of a state House political action committee that raises money to elect Republican candidates says he has not received a letter asking him to appear before the Oklahoma Ethics Commission.
Rep. Trebor Worthen, R-Oklahoma City, chairman of the House PAC, told the Tulsa World he called the Ethics Commission after it was reported he had been sent a letter to make sure that was not the case.
Gary Jones, chairman of the State Republican Party, said earlier this week the Ethics Commission is probing possible violations in GOP campaign financial dealings in 2004. Questions have been raised as to why contributions designated for the state party ended up with the Oklahoma County Republican Committee.
Jones said the party's attorney informed the party that "some people have received letters to appear" before the Ethics Commission, but Jones did not know who they were.
The commission will not confirm or deny whether it is conducting investigations.
Meanwhile, State House Democrats said Friday no one should rush to conclusions regarding the reports that House Republicans' campaign activities three years ago are being probed.
"Too often, politicians trip over each other rushing to judgment in these matters," said Rep. Danny Morgan, head of the House's minority party. "Right now, there are simply more questions than there are answers. We should patiently wait while the Ethics Commission investigators do their work."
On the other hand, Rep. Chuck Hoskin, the House Democrats' new caucus chairman, said the allegations appear to be serious, "involving Republicans at high levels of state government."
Questions have been raised as to why Republican candidates' contributions to the state party in 2004 were diverted to the Oklahoma County Republican Party, unbeknownst to some of the contributors.
Todd Hiett, then House speaker, said he did not know that the money intended for the state party ended up in the coffers of the Oklahoma County Republican Party. But he said Rep. Lance Cargill, who headed up the House Republican caucus, should be able to answer questions because he was responsible for the Republican PAC's activities.
Cargill, now House speaker, has not addressed the question as to why the money was moved.
Cargill, R-Harrah, released a statement Thursday saying, "We will play by the rules and work diligently to resolve any matter, and to show that unfounded claims that have been made are false."
The speaker said he did not "solicit, receive, deposit or expend any Victory Fund checks" contributed by candidates to the party.
Candidates can contribute money to parties but cannot designate how those contributions must be spent.
Meanwhile, another former lawmaker, Rep. Mark Liotta, R-Tulsa, said Friday he wrote a check to the state party for $5,000 at the time and was asked later by a staffer with the House PAC if it would be all right for the county party, instead of the state, to have the money.
http://wwwtmrcom.blogspot.com/2007/09/ktok-cargill-refuses-to-discuss-ethics.html
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
KTOK: Cargill Says He's Not Been Notified Of Probe
From NewsRadio 1000 KTOK ~ State House Speaker Lance Cargill on Wednesday made it clear he did not want to answer questions about a reported State Ethics Commission probe that could involve his fundraising in 2004.
It was at an Oklahoma City event where KTOK's Michael Cross attempted to question the Republican leader about the possible investigation.
Cross: "Have you heard about an ethics investigation or anything like that?" Cargill: "No, I think actually Damon has talked to the station."
Cross: "I was wondering if you heard anything about that at all?" Cargill walked off and State House Communications Director Damon Gardenhire was left to handle things.
"I guess first of all I'm not aware of an investigation, but secondly, the Speaker's not received any notification of anything like that. If they were conducting one like that with him, they would typically notify him and they haven't done so."
The reported Ethics Commission investigation centers around money raised by top House Republicans in 2004.
Labels: Ethics, Lance Cargill,
posted by Mike @ 4:05 PM 1 comments
1 Comments:
At 6:01 PM, Mike Donovan said...
I remember something an old friend of mine, the late Herb Johnson, used to say: "If you don't stand up and talk about it - that's all they're going to talk about."
His point, of course, whether you DO have something to hide or you DON'T, you better stand up and eagerly discuss it, even it means saying nothing for five minutes or the result is going to be, "He has something to hide *because he won't talk about it*."
For Cargill to walk off like that does NOT look good.
Wednesday, September 19, 2007
KTOK: Cargill Says He's Not Been Notified Of Probe
From NewsRadio 1000 KTOK ~ State House Speaker Lance Cargill on Wednesday made it clear he did not want to answer questions about a reported State Ethics Commission probe that could involve his fundraising in 2004.
It was at an Oklahoma City event where KTOK's Michael Cross attempted to question the Republican leader about the possible investigation.
Cross: "Have you heard about an ethics investigation or anything like that?" Cargill: "No, I think actually Damon has talked to the station."
Cross: "I was wondering if you heard anything about that at all?" Cargill walked off and State House Communications Director Damon Gardenhire was left to handle things.
"I guess first of all I'm not aware of an investigation, but secondly, the Speaker's not received any notification of anything like that. If they were conducting one like that with him, they would typically notify him and they haven't done so."
The reported Ethics Commission investigation centers around money raised by top House Republicans in 2004.
Labels: Ethics, Lance Cargill,
posted by Mike @ 4:05 PM 1 comments
1 Comments:
At 6:01 PM, Mike Donovan said...
I remember something an old friend of mine, the late Herb Johnson, used to say: "If you don't stand up and talk about it - that's all they're going to talk about."
His point, of course, whether you DO have something to hide or you DON'T, you better stand up and eagerly discuss it, even it means saying nothing for five minutes or the result is going to be, "He has something to hide *because he won't talk about it*."
For Cargill to walk off like that does NOT look good.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)