Athenæum

Previous entry | Next entry

02/12/2004: Criminally Absurd Criminally Absurd

8 Year Old Donates $1,000 to Local Congresswoman
or: "Rich? Want to donate to your favorite rich politician, but can't get around those pesky campaign finance laws? Have your kids drop a few Gs on your behalf."
via New York Times:

It did not take Kaelynn Adams-Haack long to decide she wanted to support the re-election campaign of Representative Tammy Baldwin, Democrat of Wisconsin. The two met at a dinner party, talked for part of the evening and by the time Kaelynn left she had decided that she wanted to give the congresswoman a $1,000 contribution.

And she did - as soon as she checked with her parents. Then Kaelynn headed home to resume the life of a first grader: homework, chores and the usual fun and games.

"I knew not to give her too much and not to give her too little, so I gave her $1,000," said Kaelynn, who is now 8 and says she hopes to make more donations in the future.

While Kaelynn may be a little girl with an uncommon interest in politics who has every right to make donations, contributions from people her age are often used by adults as a way around laws restricting how much an individual can give to a campaign.

The McCain-Feingold campaign finance law, which took effect more than a year ago, included a ban on donations by those under 18. But in December, the Supreme Court struck down the prohibition, saying it trampled free-speech rights.

It's illegal for PACs, unions and single-issue groups to fund ads on TV (but not illegal are singularly-rich individuals airing those same ads) within a month of an election, yet the SCOTUS says THIS is a violation of free speech rights?!

McCain-Feingold is yet another example of laws masquerading as "anti-special interests" that simply make it harder for the average american to participate on the level that exceedingly rich individuals can. More than half of all campaign donors from 1992 to 2002, identifying themselves as "students", gave more than $1,000. Less than 1/10th of 1% of Americans contributed at that level.

Read on.



The result is that people who are too young to drink, drive or vote can again contribute to presidential and Congressional campaigns, a practice that political strategists and fund-raisers say may intensify as competition for donations heats up. This in turn gives greater influence to families with political interests who want to funnel large amounts to politicians, campaign finance experts say.

The Supreme Court decision opens the way for donor families to continue "bundling" their money, as many have in years past.

Samuel J. Heyman, a corporate raider in the 1980's from Westport, Conn., and five members of his family gave at least $50,000 to each of a handful of candidates in 2003, campaign finance reports show. Among those contributing were his daughter, Jennifer, who made headlines in Connecticut in the early 1990's when she began donating at age 14.

Mark Tabak, a health care executive from Livingston, N.J., and three members of his family gave $80,000 to the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee in 1996, reports show. Among them were his two teenage daughters.

In another example, a man from Maryland paid a $4,000 penalty to the Federal Election Commission after admitting that he gave $4,000 in contributions in 1992 and 1993 through his son, who was not even 2 years old.

While it is illegal to give in someone else's name, officials at the Federal Election Commission say that cases against minors are difficult to enforce and that only a handful have been made over the years. The commission has repeatedly recommended an age restriction to Congress.

"I would have preferred that the Supreme Court left it in," said Steve Grossman, a Democratic fund-raiser from Boston who has been supporting Howard Dean. "It's a clear, bright line, the kind of line that people need so that they don't get into trouble."

There is no way to know precisely how many minors contribute, because candidates are not required to list the age of their donors. Yet more than 9,500 contributors, including Kaelynn, identified themselves only as students in the donor rolls from 1992 to 2002, according to data from PoliticalMoneyLine, which tracks campaign finance. And that is just those who gave more than $200 to candidates, political parties or political action committees.

They gave about $12.2 million. More than half gave $1,000 or more, joining the top tier of donors throughout the country. Less than one-tenth of 1 percent of Americans contributed at that level in the last election, said the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks campaign finance.

The new campaign finance law doubled to $4,000 the amount that individuals can give to candidates for a primary and a general election. That means a couple giving the maximum can now contribute $8,000 and a family of three can give $12,000 in a Congressional race. Political action committees can give only $10,000.

While few people expect to see PAC's eclipsed, the increases do give families more influence. For example, five members of the Billingsley family, which owns a real estate development company near Dallas, combined to give at least $10,000 to Ron Kirk, the former Dallas mayor and a family friend, in his unsuccessful 2002 Senate race.

The family gave the same amount as PAC's run by the National Association of Trial Lawyers and the ironworkers union. Had they each given the maximum this year, they could have contributed $20,000, twice what these PAC's can give.

Among the family members was Anne Billingsley, who was 15 when she gave and is 17 now; her two older siblings; and her parents, Lucy and Henry.

Lucy Billingsley said her children had their own money and made their own decisions but she acknowledged that parents played a role.

"Unless you get an impassioned youth who is doing something on their own, children think much like their parents do," Ms. Billingsley said. "Of course, parental influence is there."

There are many who feel there is nothing wrong with teenagers participating.

The legal challenge was led by the American Center for Law and Justice, a group that focuses on civil and religious liberties. It was founded by Pat Robertson in 1990 to "undo the damage done by almost a century of liberal thinking and activism," according to the group's own history.

The group's chief counsel, Jay Sekulow, who successfully argued the case before the Supreme Court, said parents should not be able to give through their children. However, he said that this could be prevented by better enforcement and that an age limit violated constitutional rights.

"I saw it as really sending the wrong message to teens, who we want to get involved in the political process," Mr. Sekulow said.

Mr. Sekulow and his colleagues assembled a group of teenage plaintiffs, many of whom came from TeenPact, a civics program for Christian teenagers run by Tim Echols of Georgia. Among them was Mr. Echols's daughter Emily, who was 14 when the suit was filed and who says teenagers should be able to contribute. "That is the only way most teens can get involved," said Ms. Echols, now 15. "There are those who want a voice but can't volunteer for a campaign."

In most cases, fund-raisers say it is the family itself that decides to give, driven by business interests, ideology or a personal connection to the candidate.

Such was the case for Kaelynn Adams-Haack, whose parents, Debbie Adams and Kami Haack, own a chain of houses for adults with developmental disabilities. They also own a furniture store in Wisconsin. While Ms. Adams and Ms. Haack now live here in The Woodlands, just north of Houston, they came to know Ms. Baldwin, the congresswoman, when they lived in Wisconsin.

Ms. Adams has explained the political system and the importance of participating - financially and otherwise - to her daughter, who saves her weekly allowance in jars for spending, saving and contributing to church - and perhaps politics.

While Ms. Adams and Ms. Haack support both Republicans and Democrats, part of the reason they support Ms. Baldwin, Ms. Adams said, is that she is one of the few gay lawmakers in Congress.

Ms. Adams said that Kaelynn "doesn't understand the concept of congressmen and senators and governors, but she understands that Tammy is like her mommies."

Ms. Baldwin did not respond to requests for an interview.

Since meeting Ms. Baldwin, Kaelynn has seen her several times. She looks for her on television and keeps a photograph of the two of them in her pink and purple bedroom.

"She always came out to talk to me when she could talk to anybody else," Kaelynn said. "I thought she was so nice, she should get the money."