'Full of loopholes' — Mayor Adams’ 2021 fundraising shows weaknesses in campaign finance law - Gothamist

Gunnar Larson g at xny.io
Sat Jan 27 00:39:39 PST 2024

<https://gothamist.com/news>'Full of loopholes' — Mayor Adams’ 2021
fundraising shows weaknesses in campaign finance
Campaign finance regulators overseeing New York City’s generous
taxpayer-funded matching program for political campaigns flagged nearly 400
donations to Eric Adams’ 2021 mayoral campaign as possibly bundled and
requiring disclosure the campaign never provided, according to records
obtained by Gothamist. <https://gothamist.com/staff/charles-lane>

The city’s Campaign Finance Board generated the list
donations that were combined into a single contribution — a practice called
bundling — in October 2021 as part of an audit of Adams’ fundraising. It
represents nearly $396,000 in potential public matching funds for his
campaign, a Gothamist analysis of the data shows.

The board says the audit is meant to instill confidence in the public
financing program, where small-dollar donations are matched 8-to-1
<https://www.nyccfb.info/program/how-it-works> with taxpayer funds.
Officials said the audit has been paused while the FBI investigates whether
the mayor’s 2021 campaign collected illegal foreign and straw donations

But the federal probe has also made abundantly clear that rules and
enforcement around campaign finance law leave a lot of room for improvement.

“It's unfortunate, but there can be a gap between the intent and the
specific black letter of the law,” said Nicole Gordon, the Campaign Finance
Board’s founding executive director, in an interview.

Neither Adams nor his campaign have been accused of wrongdoing. Still, the
campaign appears to have failed to disclose some fundraising events
 and bundlers
also known as “intermediaries
<https://www.nyccfb.info/PDF/templates/intermediary_statement.pdf>,” who
deliver donations from others, reporting by Gothamist and other news
outlets including The City
 and Politico
found. Although intermediaries must generally be disclosed to the CFB, the
rules around them are contradictory and riddled with loopholes — making
enforcement tenuous and transparency elusive, according to several election
attorneys interviewed.

The Campaign Finance Act outlines several exemptions where intermediaries
are not required to make disclosures, including when they’re relatives of
contributors, or when they're fundraisers who are recruited by the campaign
and perhaps working only as volunteers.

But legal experts also pointed to several less obvious loopholes that could
obviate the need to disclose bundlers: for example, if the campaign paid
for at least part of the fundraising event, or if a well-heeled donor
hosted a party with their friends where the candidate solicited donations.

A spokesperson for the campaign said the city's rules contain many
exemptions for having to disclose intermediaries, including types of
contributions, the way they’re collected and who attends the fundraiser.

Election lawyers and campaign finance experts agreed. Enforcement of the
intermediary rules hinges on how they’re interpreted and even the Campaign
Finance Board acknowledged that the regulations are outdated.

The ultimate intent of the law is to give the public a better view of who
might be trying to gain influence with candidates.

Eric Friedman, NYC Campaign Finance Board assistant executive director

“Modernizing the law to address these gaps or exceptions would ultimately
provide campaigns with better direction and provide the public with better
disclosure,” the CFB’s Assistant Executive Director Eric Friedman said in
an interview. “The ultimate intent of the law is to give the public a
better view of who might be trying to gain influence with candidates by
going and raising money for them.”

Friedman added he expects the City Council to update the rules with
stronger disclosure requirements this year. But with new councilmembers and
committee assignments after last year’s elections — and the Council gearing
up for tense battles with Adams over the city’s budget
 and other
it’s not clear when this might happen.

The donations in the list, which Gothamist received through a public
records request, were flagged because they came from multiple people with
the same employers, on the same dates, and often in similar amounts. The
CFB requested further documentation on the flagged contributions before the
audit was paused. Once flagged, auditors will ask the campaign for
clarifications and documentation around the donors and events.

While CFB officials could not say how much taxpayer money would ultimately
flow to Adams’ campaign as a result of the suspected bundles, the board
could claw back any improperly remitted funds once the audit is completed.
Adams received more than $10 million
total matching funds for his 2021 campaign.

The list shows the donations were made between December 2018 and September
2021 by people in various industries, including real estate, law,
transportation, education, food and health care. The donations amounted to
roughly $49,000, not accounting for potential matching funds.

Whether any of these suspected bundles actually had to be disclosed,
though, is a gray area clouded by the knot of laws and regulations on
bundlers for city campaigns, legal experts said.

“It's so full of loopholes and so vague, and you're asking treasurers and
campaigns to interpret it?” said longtime election lawyer and former New
York state senator Martin Connor. “It's very hard to track, and who has to
report this to the treasurer? They may not even realize that somebody else
asked somebody to send in a check.”

New York attorney Laurence Laufer, who helped draft the law on
intermediaries while serving as the CFB’s general counsel from its
establishment in 1988 to 2000, said the rules are “tricky” because they’re
laid out in multiple places: the city’s Campaign Finance Act
<https://www.nyccfb.info/law/act>, CFB regulations
<https://www.nyccfb.info/law/rules>, and the candidate handbook
<https://www.nyccfb.info/candidate-services/handbook/> the board publishes.

“At a minimum, you have three sources of information here,” he said. “And
that still leaves out CFB advisory opinions and any communications CFB
staff may have sent, and the campaigns have the ability to rely on that as

Other election lawyers drew a distinction between the law’s intent and
implementation, saying the gap gives campaigns leeway to circumvent having
to disclose would-be bundlers in many cases.

“Of course there are always ambiguities, and it is hoped that campaigns do
as much due diligence as possible to make sure that they are in compliance
with the law,” said Jerry Goldfeder, a campaign finance attorney at the law
firm Cozen O’Connor and an election law professor at Fordham University.

Gordon, the former CFB director who's now a public affairs professor at
Baruch College, said some campaign lawyers prevail in finding loopholes for
bundlers because the law doesn’t — and can’t — define every possible case.

“Lawyers are entitled to argue for their clients in ways that can defeat
the purpose of the law,” she said.

It's unfortunate, but there can be a gap between the intent and the
specific black letter of the law.

Nicole Gordon, NYC Campaign Finance Board founding executive director and
Baruch College professor

Although CFB rules require bundlers to be “known” by a campaign, it could
receive numerous identical donations on the same day from a dozen employees
of the same company hoping to signal its influence by coordinating their
contributions. Under current rules, campaigns are not obligated to inquire
if a bundler was involved.

“How would the [campaign] treasurer know if somebody asked somebody else to
go online and make a contribution?” Martin Connor said.

Still, some election lawyers said the City Council could close loopholes in
the law by requiring more due diligence of campaigns. One proposed solution
involves establishing a threshold for campaigns to attest an intermediary
wasn’t used, say, when multiple donors have the same employer and gave at
or around the same time, or in identical amounts.

“The more disclosure the better, so voters know who is contributing to and
raising money for candidates,” Goldfeder said. “Whether voters take that
into consideration when they vote is an entirely different story.”

Others expressed a dimmer view about policymakers’ ability to limit money’s
role in politics — efforts that, in the United States, largely date to the
19th century <https://www.opensecrets.org/resources/learn/timeline>.

“And here we are 200 years later, still worrying about the influence of
money on politics,” said Connor.

*Brigid Bergin contributed reporting.*
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: text/html
Size: 19890 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20240127/922f1d3c/attachment.txt>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: 3a93f85c-51fd-4f8d-92cf-081df4233212.mhtml
Type: application/octet-stream
Size: 2257371 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/attachments/20240127/922f1d3c/attachment-0001.obj>

More information about the cypherpunks mailing list