The address of The Governor’s Club, 144 Kings Highway in Dover, was used by eight companies tied to developer Michael Zimmerman in contributions sent to Gov. Jack Markell’s campaign in 2008. The address is also the location of Zimmerman’s business and was developed by Zimmerman. JASON MINTO/SPECIAL TO THE NEWS JOURNAL
I fully concur with George Fuller here ~ Charity probe rejection says much about politics
If I didn’t know any better, I would think the Republican Party Chairman Charlie Copeland was new to our state of Delaware (“Biden rebuffs call for probe,” Aug. 13). Can you imagine that he believes Attorney General Beau Biden (a Democrat) should look into the possibility of Gov. Jack Markell (also a Democrat) possibly tweaking the state’s finance law when it comes to improper campaign donations, by his donating the monies to charity? Did Gov. Markell gain anything by the donations? Of course he did; was he wrong? Ask Beau Biden.Copeland isn't pulling this out of his hat. He cited the law, Title 15 Section 8043(h), in letters to the Election Commissioner and to Attorney General Biden. WDDE had the story HERE.
George J. Fuller, Newport
........Governor Jack Markell (D-Delaware) sidestepped Delaware’s election code. Last week, Markell’s office said his campaign donated about $28,000 to charity after learning they could’ve been illegal contributions from D.C. accountants.It's not Matt Denn, Beau Biden or Jack Markell's call to refuse to "inappropriately enrich" donors by giving back illegal campaign contributions! We want you guys to follow the law!
Copeland contends that under Delaware law, a candidate has to return those contributions within seven days of knowing they were illegal.
But Election Commissioner Elaine Manlove says that only applies if the donations are proven to be illegal.
“My reading is that the governor acted with an abundance of caution because he could not substantiate the contributions he received were illegal contributions and it didn’t make me think that I should take any further action,” said Manlove. “But now that it’s been brought to my attention again, I can investigate further.”
........Markell’s office didn’t comment on the newest round of contributions, but issued a statement about the Tigani donations.“The Governor gave Tigani-related contributions to charity because returning them, as Mr. Copeland suggests, would have inappropriately enriched Mr. Tigani or his co-conspirators for their conduct.” “It is our understanding that the Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General and other candidates did likewise. Special Deputy Attorney General Norman Veasey was made aware of how these charitable contributions were being handled.”
Beau Biden should be finding another independent authority to handle this, not refusing to investigate. He also re-donated to charity instead of returning the illegally gained funds. He is not in a position to refuse to have this matter settled.
- I love how when the crooks get caught taking the donations, they send it to a charity. That makes it all just peachy keen.
- Yeah, charities run by their own friends and family. Or they are given to curry favor with unions or a photo op. Last I checked when a criminal takes money, they have to give it back.
- This just goes to reinforce the fact that many politicians have their hands out all the time for all the money they can get. They say whatever people want to hear (like how there needs to be reform of the political process) & then they take all the money & run. We have yet to see any politicians be held accountable for this very unsavory business. Donating the illegal money to charities of one's choice is not improving the way one is being perceived as being dishonest & lacking integrity, Jack Markell.An August 10th editorial followed ~ Make campaign laws transparent
A second Delaware businessman has been charged with making fraudulent campaign donations. This time the money went to Gov. Markell’s 2008 election campaign fund. Earlier the campaign gave contributions to a charity because the donor was a Washington group that pleaded guilty to setting up a straw donor scheme. The Markell campaign also sent Christopher Tigani’s campaign donations to a charity after the Delaware businessman went to jail for illegal dealings related to funding several candidates.The August 13th (News Journal) report by Jonathan Starkey and Maureen Milford, How developers try to buy influence, revealed that Markell's campaign gave the green light for this underhanded practice. In the 2008 memo, his team invited this abuse, while legal, where entities could unethically contribute in multiples well over the limits for anyone but those who practice the art of the LLC.
The Markell campaign is not unique and there is no evidence it broke any laws. However, the current campaign system allows contributors to set up multiple identities for donations. Land developers seem particularly adept at making contributions this way. It is all legal. And that’s the biggest problem. It is an end run around the spirit of the campaign laws. Politicians need campaign money to run. Contributors are willing to help them. For that money, they at least gain access to the elected officials. And access means power.
The public should know who is giving what.
Markell, who championed campaign finance reform during his first term, also has been one of the largest beneficiaries of the legal practice that developers used to give more than the state’s $1,200 contribution limit allowed for an individual and business. His campaign gave developers and others a road map in a 2008 memo that outlined the loophole they could use as Markell was soliciting money during his primary run against then-Lt. Gov. John Carney. “If someone owns less than 50% of an entity, then the entity may give up to $1,200 AND the individual may separately give $1,200,” according to the memo sent by Brian Quinn, then Markell’s campaign finance director, to “supporters/potential supporters of Jack Markell.”
In addition to the contributions Markell received from development companies tied to Zimmerman and Heisler, both also contributed the maximum amount allowed for individuals. Four entities with the same address as businesses associated with Sussex County developer and businessman Preston Schell’s organization in Rehoboth Beach also gave maximum donations to Markell, resulting in at least $4,800 in donations. Schell also gave the maximum amount as an individual. Denis O’Sullivan, who contributed several times to Markell’s campaign in 2008 using separate companies, said he and his partners were trying to raise their profile with the would-be governor. O’Sullivan is a Wilmington real estate developer and investor who was involved in a group that wanted to build a casino on the Christina River.
.........Separately, critics say the practice of real estate developers juicing their donation limits through corporate entities, while legal, gives those developers an outsized voice in the political process, allowing greater access to politicians than others, including environmental or growth-conscious groups. “It’s grossly unfair,” Browning said. “It gives real estate developers a lot more political influence in the community of people who might have influence on decisions affecting them.”
On August 3rd, Delaware Liberal called the charitable donations a non-scandal HERE but later posted this ~ An Opportunity for Campaign Finance Reform
Also see ~
Say It Ain't So, Joe : Delaware Liberal June 2011 Read the comments.With what I call the HIGH DEMs (top elected Democratic state officials and party leaders) so deeply involved in this heinous practice, will there be any political will to create legislation to clean things up in Dover next year?
Chris Tigani Story Blows Up Local Media Today | Delaware Way June 2011
WDEL 1150AM - Guilty pleas entered in campaign finance case May 2013
State drops lawsuit over disputed land lease - Delaware Newszap June 2013
The General Assembly can make it happen next year through Norman Veasey's recommendations.
More from Starkey and Milford's How developers try to buy influence,
Veasey, who has been investigating campaign finance practices in Delaware for two years, is expected to recommend changes in the use of socalled “artificial entities,” such as partnerships or limited liability companies, when contributing to campaigns. Under Delaware law, it is legal for corporations, partnerships or other artificial entities to make contributions to a candidate as long as they follow a couple rules. Companies can contribute the maximum amount of $1,200 allowed for individuals. Companies and other legal entities tied to one owner also can contribute the maximum amount, a practice that could give some owners more clout in elections.
But there are limitations intended to restrict majority owners of companies from contributing more than the individual maximum amount. Election law requires disclosure to campaigns of the names and addresses of people who have an interest of 50 percent or greater in a company. Any donations from those companies are counted proportionally against the partner’s individual donation limit. If a partner doesn’t hold a 50 percent interest, the company’s donation isn’t counted against his individual contribution limit. So for example, if a developer holds a partial interest in a partnership or limited liability company, he can use that company to contribute another $1,200 to a candidate in addition to his individual contribution. Companies and partnerships aren’t required to disclose their owners to the public, affording a level of anonymity to the developers behind the entities that is not available to the average political donor.
Mike Castle, a former Republican governor and congressman, said transparency should be built into the contribution process. Ownership interests behind the corporate entities should be made public.
~*~de
0 comments:
Post a Comment