The FEC has released this draft final rule in the post-WRTL rulemaking. Actually, it still has two alternatives: one of which would exempt from disclosure ads subject to the WRTL exemption; the other which would not. Richard Briffault and I had submitted these comments to the FEC urging it not to extend the WRTL exemption to the disclosure requirements. It is unclear to me what the politics are about securing 4 votes for either position at this point.
On the scope of the exemption (assuming it passes), hereare three simple rules for a corporation or union that wants to spend unlimited sums supporting or opposing a candidate for federal office:
1. Don’t mention the election, candidacy, political party, opposing candidate or voting
2. Don’t speak directly to the candidate or officeholder’s character, qualifications or fitness for office.
3. Do focus on a “public policy issue” and “urge the candidate” to take a position on the issue or contact the candidate on the issue.
Yes, my friends, sham issue advocacy is coming back in a big way (and potentially we won’t even know which corporations and unions are bankrolling it).
So the following should be just fine under the FEC’s soon-to-be adopted test:
“Call Sen. Clinton and tell her to stop coddling illegal aliens and terrorists by supporting the NY drivers’ license plan.”
“Call Mitt Romney and tell him more of our soldiers shouldn’t die in an unnecessary war in Iraq.”
“Call Rudi Giuliani and tell him that his support for gay rights is ruining the moral fabric of this country.”