SAC BEE: Ami Bera fundraising pattern sidesteps donation limits
This morning, a Sacramento Bee deep-dive reveals that Ami Bera and his entire family, including his father who just days ago pleaded guilty to election fraud, worked hand-in-hand in a sophisticated nationwide donor swapping scheme. This revelation strikes a deep blow to Ami Bera’s claims that he and his staff were blissfully unaware of his 83 year old father’s actions by highlighting exactly how involved the whole Bera family was in financing Ami’s campaigns.
Kathay Feng, executive director of the non-partisan California Common Cause agrees, telling the Bee, “While I can’t say that the candidate should be aware of everything that happens, certainly when family members have done this as a consistent pattern in the past, I think it raises questions about the candidate’s knowledge in the instance of his dad.”
On May 10th, Babulal Bera plead guilty for illegal reimbursing nearly $270,000 in donations. The Bee’s investigation uncovered another $240,000 in funds raised through “donor swapping” between the Bera family and other campaigns around the country. In at least one instance, Ami and his father donated to the same candidate on the same day in clear coordination. As the federal investigation continues, Ami Bera and his staff will be forced to answer even more questions about how he could have no idea of his father’s actions when he was so clearly intimately involved in a sophisticated fundraising scheme.
This is far from over. “Asked whether the Bera family’s donation pattern was scrutinized, Deb Duckett, a spokeswoman for the U.S. attorney’s office, repeated a previous statement that the investigation is ongoing, and said the office does not discuss details of its probes.”
NRCC Comment: “These revelations clearly show that Ami Bera worked closely with his father to finance his campaigns in any and every way possible. Bera’s know-nothing defense is becoming increasingly laughable as new findings and contradictions continue to show that there is so much more to this story.” – NRCC Spokesman Zach Hunter
Ami Bera fundraising pattern sidesteps donation limits
The Sacramento Bee
By Christopher Cadelago
May 21, 2016 – 8PM
http://www.sacbee.com/news/investigations/the-public-eye/article78992527.html
Democratic Rep. Ami Bera, whose father is awaiting sentencing on two felony counts of election fraud, for years has engaged in a complex series of campaign donations involving his parents and the families of other congressional candidates, federal records show.
Beginning six years ago, when he unsuccessfully challenged former Republican Rep. Dan Lungren, Bera and his family wrote checks to other Democrats, almost always for the maximum amount allowed under federal law. Those candidates or their families gave similar amounts to Bera, and the contributions often occurred within days of one another.
The practice differs from the reimbursement scheme perpetrated by Babulal “Bob” Bera, 83, in which he repaid donors as a way to direct more money to his son’s campaign committee. Federal officials and Ami Bera maintain the congressman, who has represented a suburban Sacramento County district since defeating Lungren in a 2012 rematch, was unaware of his father’s illegal activities.
The pattern of giving involving other candidates, known as donor swapping, is most often seen among deep-pocketed families. Campaign finance experts said such see-saw contributions generally do not run afoul of federal law, but say they are a way to sidestep individual donation limits and help show fundraising prowess.
“Nothing really stops two people from saying, ‘I’ll give to your guy if you give to mine,’ ” said Bradley Smith, professor at Capital University Law School in Columbus, Ohio, and a former chairman of the Federal Election Commission.
Larry Noble, general counsel for the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan election reform group, said an argument can be made that coordinated exchanges between candidates’ families evade the law, which prohibits making contributions in the name of another.
“I think in spirit it is, but it’s a hard case, legally, to make,” said Noble, who served as general counsel of the FEC. “If you can show very specifically that the money was given and the intent was that it be turned around and given to you, I think there is a question of whether or not it violates the contribution limit,” he added. “Certainly, it is an attempt to get around the contribution limit.”
Read the full piece here.