The Federal Election Commission (FEC) on Thursday rejected a proposal to address foreign influence in United States election spending, the third time the commission has shot down similar proposals since reports of Russian interference in the 2016 election began emerging about two years ago.
The motion, which was proposed by Vice Chair Ellen Weintraub, would have begun the process of potentially implementing new FEC rules intended to discourage foreign spending in US elections. Among those possible new rules was a requirement that super PACs and other groups state they did not use money from foreign sources in US elections.
The FEC’s two Republican commissioners voted against the proposal, citing a reluctance to move forward with the motion until more information about foreign election interference is released.
Foreign spending in elections is illegal, but Weintraub expressed concern about the possibility of foreign groups using dark money to tip the scales in the 2018 midterms. She urged the commission to vote for the rulemaking before the November elections.
“We are receiving information from a variety of public and private sources that indicate that we should be seriously concerned about people trying to influence the elections in 2018, and spending serious money to do it,” Weintraub said.
Thursday’s FEC vote came about a week after leaders of the bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, which is investigating international meddling in the 2016 elections, released a statement addressing Russian interference. Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.), who chairs the committee, said he had “no doubt” Russia made efforts to influence the 2016 races.
Weintraub said she wanted to propose the rulemaking again because of the Senate committee’s bipartisan agreement that Russia meddled in the 2016 election.
Commissioners deadlocked on the proposal across party lines. Weintraub and Commissioner Steven Walther, both Democrats, voted in favor of the rulemaking, while FEC Chair Caroline Hunter and Commissioner Matthew Petersen, the two Republicans, voted against the motion.
Hunter and Petersen both said they wanted to wait until additional information about foreign election influence is revealed before voting on the proposal. Petersen said he could support the rulemaking in the future, but he would not vote for the proposal before the intelligence committee and other groups finish their investigations.
“There are going to be findings that are going to be issued by the (intelligence committee), and I think that I look forward to seeing what those findings are to see to what extent the efforts to interfere involve matters within our jurisdiction,” Petersen said.
The FEC has already taken some bipartisan steps to curb foreign influence in US elections, Petersen said. He cited a plan passed by the FEC in March to implement stricter disclosure requirements for political ads on internet platforms like Facebook.
The federal government has also indicted foreign individuals and companies alleged to have violated laws prohibiting foreign interference in elections, he added.
After the commission rejected Weintraub’s initial rulemaking, she proposed a narrower motion which was also voted down.
In a statement Thursday afternoon, Weintraub chided the Republican commissioners who rejected the motions, saying the “time for excuses and delays is over.”
“The Director of National Intelligence (Dan Coats) is satisfied that the Russians are targeting the 2018 midterm elections, but my colleagues on the Commission are not? At this point, I frankly don’t think they would be satisfied by anything short of an FEC expenditure report personally signed by Vladimir Putin,” Weintraub said in the statement.
We know Russia spent millions to influence the 2016 elections and is targeting this year’s. We know @FEC can do something about it.
But when I proposed today that we launch an expedited rulemaking to harden our defenses against foreign influence, my GOP colleagues said “No.” pic.twitter.com/uRKHlo0i6O
— Ellen L Weintraub (@EllenLWeintraub) May 24, 2018
Most FEC rulemakings that included proposals to address concerns about foreign nationals have been rejected since 2011. The commission moved forward with revised campaign finance rules in 2014, but Weintraub objected to that motion, saying at the time it failed to sufficiently address dark money.
Only four of the six FEC commissioner positions are currently filled, and all four are serving expired terms, the Center for Public Integrity reported. The commissioners serve six-year terms, but they can remain in their positions until the president and Senate replaces them.
Truthout Is Preparing to Meet Trump’s Agenda With Resistance at Every Turn
Dear Truthout Community,
If you feel rage, despondency, confusion and deep fear today, you are not alone. We’re feeling it too. We are heartsick. Facing down Trump’s fascist agenda, we are desperately worried about the most vulnerable people among us, including our loved ones and everyone in the Truthout community, and our minds are racing a million miles a minute to try to map out all that needs to be done.
We must give ourselves space to grieve and feel our fear, feel our rage, and keep in the forefront of our mind the stark truth that millions of real human lives are on the line. And simultaneously, we’ve got to get to work, take stock of our resources, and prepare to throw ourselves full force into the movement.
Journalism is a linchpin of that movement. Even as we are reeling, we’re summoning up all the energy we can to face down what’s coming, because we know that one of the sharpest weapons against fascism is publishing the truth.
There are many terrifying planks to the Trump agenda, and we plan to devote ourselves to reporting thoroughly on each one and, crucially, covering the movements resisting them. We also recognize that Trump is a dire threat to journalism itself, and that we must take this seriously from the outset.
After the election, the four of us sat down to have some hard but necessary conversations about Truthout under a Trump presidency. How would we defend our publication from an avalanche of far right lawsuits that seek to bankrupt us? How would we keep our reporters safe if they need to cover outbreaks of political violence, or if they are targeted by authorities? How will we urgently produce the practical analysis, tools and movement coverage that you need right now — breaking through our normal routines to meet a terrifying moment in ways that best serve you?
It will be a tough, scary four years to produce social justice-driven journalism. We need to deliver news, strategy, liberatory ideas, tools and movement-sparking solutions with a force that we never have had to before. And at the same time, we desperately need to protect our ability to do so.
We know this is such a painful moment and donations may understandably be the last thing on your mind. But we must ask for your support, which is needed in a new and urgent way.
We promise we will kick into an even higher gear to give you truthful news that cuts against the disinformation and vitriol and hate and violence. We promise to publish analyses that will serve the needs of the movements we all rely on to survive the next four years, and even build for the future. We promise to be responsive, to recognize you as members of our community with a vital stake and voice in this work.
Please dig deep if you can, but a donation of any amount will be a truly meaningful and tangible action in this cataclysmic historical moment.
We’re with you. Let’s do all we can to move forward together.
With love, rage, and solidarity,
Maya, Negin, Saima, and Ziggy