Campaign Finance

Subterms

    More stories

    • 138 Shares99 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Leans On Creative Bookkeeping to Keep Up in Cash Race

      by

      Donald J. Trump’s political operation has been taking extraordinary measures in a bid to stay financially competitive with Vice President Kamala Harris, deploying aggressive and creative accounting strategies that test the legal limits of how far a candidate can go to offload the core costs of running for president.The most startling example is the official payroll of the former president’s campaign committee.He had only 11 people on it, as of August.That is a tiny fraction of the more than 200 people Mr. Trump had on his campaign payroll four years ago and the more than 600 people on Ms. Harris’s campaign payroll in August, federal records show.The reason Mr. Trump now has so few on the payroll is that he is shuffling costs from his campaign committee to other accounts allied or shared with the Republican Party. The goal of the seemingly arcane accounting maneuver is to free up millions of dollars, which would otherwise be locked up in party and fund-raising accounts, to spend on television ads for Mr. Trump.And the shifting of payroll is just one piece of the financial puzzle.Mr. Trump has also not been using his campaign committee to pay for many of the big rallies that are the signature events of his campaign, according to two people with knowledge of his accounting who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal matters. Instead, the Trump team is, for accounting purposes, treating those events as fund-raisers by including backstage photo lines for contributors or donor round tables.Mr. Trump and Senator JD Vance of Ohio greeting supporters backstage before a campaign rally in Asheboro, N.C., in August.Doug Mills/The New York TimesWe are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Mayor Adams’s Rivals Reveal Fund-Raising Totals. Mr. Adams? Who Knows.

      by

      With Mayor Eric Adams’s future in flux as he faces federal bribery charges, his challengers prepare for the possibility of an election before the June primary.With Mayor Eric Adams facing a five-count federal indictment and at least four Democratic primary challengers next year, the quarterly fund-raising reporting deadline on Friday carried heightened intrigue.Would Mr. Adams see a significant drop-off in donations? And of the candidates seeking to replace him, who would make the most of the mayor’s problems?The answers were only partially revealed on Friday, with Mr. Adams’s fund-raising disclosures not reported by the New York City Campaign Finance Board by day’s end.It was not clear if the mayor’s campaign filed disclosures at or past the deadline, or not at all. Vito Pitta, a compliance lawyer for the Adams campaign, did not respond to requests for comment.As for Mr. Adams’s Democratic rivals, Brad Lander, the city comptroller, claimed bragging rights by bringing his fund-raising total to just under a million dollars for his mayoral campaign so far. It was enough to potentially qualify him to receive $3.5 million in taxpayer money under the city’s matching funds program, which awards candidates $8 for every dollar up to the first $250 donated by a city resident.Mr. Lander said he was in a “strong position” to qualify for the maximum amount allowed in matching funds, enabling him to hit the $7.93 million spending cap for a primary or special election, should Mr. Adams resign or be forced out. Mr. Lander also raised the most money in the three-month reporting period that ended Oct. 7, collecting just over $315,000.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Treasurer for Little-Known Brooklyn Candidate Is Charged in Fraud Scheme

      by

      Erlene King sent thousands of dollars to associates and told them to distribute the funds to others who would then donate to the campaign she worked for, federal prosecutors said.The treasurer of an ill-fated 2021 campaign for Brooklyn borough president was charged Wednesday with organizing a fraudulent donation scheme in an attempt to access at least $400,000 in public matching funds.Federal prosecutors said the treasurer, Erlene King, 71, had sent thousands of dollars to associates over roughly two and a half years in an effort to skirt campaign finance rules and boost the campaign of Anthony Jones, who would go on to lose the election after receiving roughly 3 percent of the vote. Mr. Jones has not been accused of wrongdoing.Ms. King pleaded not guilty to wire fraud in federal court on Wednesday after she opted to waive her right to have the charges presented to a grand jury.A lawyer representing Ms. King, John S. Wallenstein, said that he and his client were “discussing potential resolutions” with prosecutors. If found guilty, Ms. King could face up to 20 years in prison.New York City’s public campaign financing program provides funds for campaigns that meet certain fund-raising thresholds. During the 2021 campaign for Brooklyn borough president, the Campaign Finance Board offered to pay campaigns up to $8 for every $1 raised, but only if a campaign first received donations from a minimum number of contributors and raised a total of $50,000 in eligible contributions on its own.In an effort to meet that threshold, Ms. King organized at least $25,000 in fraudulent contributions to Mr. Jones’s campaign, according to prosecutors with the U.S. attorney’s office for the Eastern District of New York. Donations that do not originate with the person whose name appears on fund-raising records are often called “straw” donations.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 100 Shares159 Views

      in Elections

      Donald Trump Cut Ties to Some Online Fund-Raisers

      by

      Former President Donald J. Trump’s campaign cut ties late last week with a number of digital firms that had been fund-raising for the campaign and slashed the commission that the remaining vendors can retain by 10 percentage points, according to four people briefed on the changes.The moves come as Mr. Trump has fallen far behind Vice President Kamala Harris in the cash race, and they suggest that the Republican operation is seeking to narrow its donor outreach in the final weeks of the campaign to those contributors who are most immediately profitable.Mr. Trump’s campaign told the digital fund-raising companies that were being retained that their share of incoming donations was being reduced to 59 percent of new donations solicited. At least some of the firms had previously gotten as much as 70 percent of the first donation they recruited to the campaign, said the four people, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the matter.Karoline Leavitt, a Trump campaign spokeswoman, declined to answer specific questions about the changes. “President Trump is a fund-raising machine who has built the most robust list of grass-roots donors ever in politics which will fuel his return to the White House,” she said.Under the new arrangement, the Republican firm that has overseen Mr. Trump’s online fund-raising for much of the year, Launchpad, had been set to receive 1 percent of every new donation given, according to two people briefed on the matter.But at least some senior campaign officials had been unaware of that plan. After The New York Times inquired about it, the two people said that the 1 percent payment for Launchpad would not be put into place.Launchpad declined to comment.The world of digital donor list brokering and fund-raising is obscure and lucrative.The outside fund-raising firms that the Trump campaign had been working with own independent lists of regular Republican contributors. The firms then solicit those people to ask them to contribute to Mr. Trump. In exchange, the firms received a significant cut of the first donation given.This process of prospecting for new donors can be profitable for a candidate because it costs nothing and nets some money. Perhaps most important, the contact information for the new donors is given to the campaign, which can solicit them repeatedly.Mr. Trump already has amassed, by far, the largest list of small donors in Republican politics. Two people said that one reason for the change was that roughly 86 percent of the donations that outside firms were collecting were already part of the Trump database of emails.Mr. Trump’s donor list is seen as among his most valuable campaign assets, constructed over nearly a decade in politics.Maggie Haberman More

    • 138 Shares129 Views

      in Elections

      Harris Enters Homestretch With a Far Bigger, Costlier Campaign Than Trump

      by

      Vice President Kamala Harris entered the homestretch of the general election building a campaign that was bigger than former President Donald J. Trump’s in nearly every discernible category.She is raising more money than Mr. Trump, with her campaign collecting more than four times as much as his did in August.She is spending far more money than he is — nearly three times more in August.And she is holding on to more money than Mr. Trump, ending the month with $100 million more in the bank than him.The vast discrepancies between the two operations were laid bare in new filings with the Federal Election Commission on Friday night from the candidates’ two main campaign committees, Harris for President and Donald J. Trump for President Inc. The reports detailed their August fund-raising, costs and cash-on-hand as of Aug. 30, along with similar figures from their national party committees.The candidates had already announced their top-line figures for the month of August: Ms. Harris’s campaign, when combined with allied party committees, had almost tripled Mr. Trump in fund-raising, collecting $361 million for all of her committees while Mr. Trump’s campaign and associated committees took in just $130 million for his. All told, including some campaign committees that don’t file reports until next month, Mr. Trump entered September facing a $110 million cash deficit against Ms. Harris, according to their self-disclosed numbers.On the surface, the campaigns built by Ms. Harris and Mr. Trump are similar. They both spend much of their money on advertising, and other big costs include private planes, payroll, postage and mail. But the new reports reveal how dissimilar the campaigns are in terms of scale.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 75 Shares179 Views

      in Elections

      Naked Emperors and Crypto Campaign Cash

      by

      Once upon a time there was an emperor who loved being fashion-forward. So he was receptive to some fast-talking tailors who promised to make him a suit out of new, high-technology fabric — a suit so comfortable that it would feel as if he were wearing nothing at all. “Fortune favors the brave,” they told him.Of course, the reason the suit was so comfortable was that it didn’t exist; the emperor was walking around naked. But the members of Congress who made up his retinue didn’t dare tell him. For they knew that the tailors deceiving the emperor controlled lavishly funded super PACs that would spend large sums to destroy the career of anyone revealing their scam.OK, I changed the story a bit. But it’s one way to understand the remarkably large role the crypto industry is playing in campaign finance this year.Bitcoin, the original cryptocurrency, was introduced 15 years ago and was promoted as a replacement for old-fashioned money. But it has yet to find significant uses that don’t involve some sort of criminal activity. The crypto industry itself has been racked by theft and scams.But while crypto has thus far been largely unable to find legitimate applications for its products, it has been spectacularly successful at marketing its offerings. Cryptocurrencies, which are traded for other crypto assets but otherwise mainly seem suited for things like money laundering and extortion, are currently worth around $2 trillion.And in this election cycle the crypto industry has become a huge player in campaign finance. I mean huge: Crypto, which isn’t a big industry in terms of employment or output (even if you posit, for the sake of argument, that what it produces is actually worth something), accounts for almost half of corporate spending on political action committees this cycle.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares139 Views

      in Elections

      Harris Campaign Says It Raised $82 Million During Convention Week

      by

      Vice President Kamala Harris’s presidential campaign said on Sunday that it raised $82 million during the Democratic National Convention last week, the latest spurt of donor enthusiasm around a presidential bid that, according to the campaign, has now raised $540 million in the last month.National party conventions are typically big-money moments for presidential candidates, offering nominees four days of lightly mediated exposure to a broad, if partisan audience. Ms. Harris has been on a historic fund-raising tear ever since President Biden announced on July 21 that he would no longer seek the Democratic nomination. The party convention, which took place from Monday to Thursday in Chicago, was full of messaging encouraging big and small donors alike to give to Ms. Harris’s campaign.After the vice president’s speech accepting the Democratic nomination on Thursday night, the Harris campaign saw its “best fund-raising hour since launch day,” the campaign’s chair, Jen O’Malley Dillon, wrote in a memo on Sunday, although she did not provide a specific amount. The $82 million total includes contributions to allied fund-raising committees with the state and national parties.The memo did not give day-by-day totals, but ActBlue, which processes online donations for many progressive causes, including Ms. Harris’s bid, reported that its platform raised $13 million on Monday, $16.5 million on Tuesday, $23 million on Wednesday and almost $37 million on Thursday.Ms. Harris’s Republican opponent, former President Donald J. Trump, did not release similar fund-raising numbers after his party’s convention in Milwaukee last month. While he was competitive with Mr. Biden in political fund-raising through 2024, Ms. Harris opened a $50 million cash-on-hand advantage at the beginning of August, after she had ascended to the top of the Democratic ticket.The $82 million raised during the four days of the Democratic convention is roughly on par with the $81 million the Harris campaign said it raised in the first 24 hours after Mr. Biden’s decision to drop out. More