Comments on: FEC Fines Kerry-Edwards Campaign $1.3 Million

By: Steven Taylor

Steven Taylor — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 15:58:53 +0000

Christopher/Mitch:

James' point is, I think, that in terms of curtailing the behavior that the fine is supposed to be targeting, this is a worthless process.

This won't curtail future bad behavior by the Kerry-Edwards campaign as it no longer exists and will never exist again (at least not as an office-seeking entity).

Further, since no individual will pay the fine, the "campaign" will, exactly what kind of disincentive is being created here?

This ultimately doesn't mean anything to anyone of consequence, hence the rules are not accomplishing their stated goal raising the legitimate question of what the point is supposed to be.

Further, given the arcane accounting used in these cases, it is unclear that a given campaign could find the error in time to correct it.

The whole thing is a waste of time and money.

By: BitsBlog » The story of the barn door and the missing horse

BitsBlog » The story of the barn door and the missing horse — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:11:58 +0000

[...] Update: Joyner notes the same Politico article, and agrees: For the sake of argument, let’s assume the FEC is right here. Let’s further posit a scenario where Kerry had received a few thousand more votes in Ohio and been elected president by a slim margin in the Electoral College. Would the election results therefore be overturned? Of course not. In that case, a $1.3 million fine would be a perfectly acceptable cost for gaining the slight advantage needed to win the presidency. [...]

By: Bithead

Bithead — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 13:11:49 +0000

This whole scenario would seem to lend argument to those opposed to McCain/Feingold as a whole.

By: Director Mitch

Director Mitch — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 08:46:36 +0000

I am also having a hard time following the argument:

- Everyone else must do it (although there are no facts to support this), so it must be ignored

- The government took a long time to investigate it, so it must be ignored

- If the outcome of the rule breaking were different, the penalty would be the same, so it must be ignored

- The penalty seems too low relative to the potential gain from the illicit activity, so it must be ignored

So can I apply these any rules?

By: Christopher

Christopher — Fri, 01 Jun 2007 05:44:29 +0000

Wow, James! You are surprised that it takes a govt. agency years to investigate something? Welcome to America!

And you say that they weren't "different from what the Bush-Cheney team did". Did Bush-Cheney get fined $1.3 million? And how come you don't think that is a significant fine? It is huge!!!