Obama Falls Down the Hatch (Act), into FEC Hot Water

COMMENTARY | Just as he believes he does not need congressional approval to engage the United States in a war in Libya and he is immune to the governance of the War Powers Resolution, President Barack Obama thinks the laws set forth in both the Hatch and Federal Election Campaign acts fall outside the boundaries of his pay grade as well.

Let's begin with Obama's violation of the Hatch Act, shall we?

According to Part I Section 101 (d) - Principles of Ethical Conduct:

"An employee shall not... solicit or accept any gifts or other item of monetary value from any person or entity seeking official action from doing business with or conducting activities regulated by the employee's agency or whose interests may be substantially affected by the performance or nonperformance of the employee's duties."

Simply put, government employees can't ask for or accept bribes in exchange for political favors.

Nevertheless, according to a June report by Politico, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) organized and promoted a March 7 White House dinner in the Blue Room for 20 "key political backers from Wall Street." While enjoying their meal with their host, President Obama, they discussed specific policies of the administration that affect the financial industry. Refer now to the above passage from the Hatch Act.

Of course, that wizard of wordplay, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney, pooh-poohed the whole notion that anything unethical had taken place.

"This was not a fundraiser," Carney scoffed, adding that, gee whiz, guys, both Republican and Democrat presidents have sent out invitations to events like "White House Christmas parties." So, what's the big dealio?

Blast from the past Richard Painter, a former member of the oxymoron otherwise known as the White House Ethics Counsel for President George W. Bush, was quick to point out the difference, saying that the DNC/Obama event was not a gathering "where they put up the Christmas tree." This was an event scheduled specifically for the assembly of "donors and doing donor maintenance."

Whatever; too many presidents have been busted with their hands stuffed in the same no-no cookie jar.

Talking Points Memo (TPM) revealed that the House Oversight Committee held a hearing June 21 to discuss possible violations of the Hatch Act by both Obama and Bush.

A report issued by the Office of Special Counsel (OSC) in January titled "Investigation of Political Activities by White House and Federal Agency Officials During the 2006 Midterm Elections" pretty much describes the purpose of the inquiry. TPM (citing a report by the Associated Press that is no longer available) noted that the OSC indeed determined that strategies used for the re-election of Bush - which involved 75 political briefings and 20 different agencies - took place "during normal business hours and in government buildings."

Furthermore, the report concluded that the Bush administration violated the Hatch Act by essentially transforming the Office of Political Affairs (OPA) "from an advisory office to the President into a campaign organization working directly for the Republican National Committee."

But George is in good company. Another report, released by the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, concluded that - just like Obama's White House dinner - the DNC used the White House to raise revenue for Bill Clinton's 1996 re-election campaign as well. From "coffees," those infamous "overnights" where guests paid to spend the night in such memorable places as the Lincoln Room, about $31.5 million was raised for Clinton's re-election coffer. Naming the endeavor "project revenue" pretty much clears up any confusion about whether or not the purpose of using the White House to raise funds was intentional.

According to a report by National Review Online, the recently released raffle video, initially called "Dinner With Barack," invites supporters to donate a minimum of $5 after which one lucky winner will enjoy an all-expenses-paid vacation to Washington, D.C., where they will have dinner with the president. The problem is, the video was clearly shot in the White House from the same spot he gave a weekly address back in February.

So many unethical cookies. So many dirty little hands.

Now, since the first two excuses the Obama administration tried to float about the video sunk like rocks - that 1) a large bundle of donations confiscated in small increments doesn't count as a real donation and 2) the residence part of the White House isn't really part of the White House - precedent is the current excuse of choice being used to justify violating FEC laws when they filmed a video in the White House promoting a raffle to raise funds for Obama's re-election campaign.

Regardless of the size of the solicited funds obtained, according to FEC laws, this is still considered a bit of a no-no:

"607. Place of solicitation1

"(a) Prohibition.

"(1) In general. It shall be unlawful for any person to solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a Federal, State, or local election from a person who is located in a room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer or employee of the United States. It shall be unlawful for an individual who is an officer or employee of the Federal Government, including the President, Vice President, and Members of Congress, to solicit or receive a donation of money or other thing of value in connection with a Federal, State, or local election, while in any room or building occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer or employee of the United States, from any person."

Again, no bribes for favors using government assets provided by your office while on the taxpayer clock are allowed. But rather than fold on the "Dinner with Barack" raffle, Real Clear Politics gives us an update saying that Obama has decided to double down. It's now the Dinner with Barack and Joe show!

In addition, the president is also pawning off access to top West Wing officials and use of the White House chef to solicit funds from reticent, cash-strapped donors. Where Obama relied heavily on his base for small donations in 2008, low approval numbers, a bad economy and growing disenchantment among his supporters has forced Obama and the DNC to get ... creative.

"Now they realize that there is this large group of donors out there," Steven Green, former Samsonite executive and current Obama fundraiser, told the Washington Post, "and for better or for worse, they need to cater to them. To be frank, I think it's somewhat new to them, and they're not quite sure how to address that donor base. [The donors] are pretty high-maintenance."

So, Obama must cater to high-maintenance donors by breaking FEC laws? Well, isn't that special? I guess it's okay - as long as none of those solicitations to "cater" to those "high-maintenance" snobs are made on government property or by use of a government phone by a government employee while on the taxpayers' clock and none of the access to the West Wing officials or the White House chef takes place on government property or while the aforementioned White House employees are on taxpayer time during either the initiation or consummation of quid pro quo.

By the way, according to the FEC rules, "A person who violates" the above mentioned "section shall be fined not more than $5,000, imprisoned not more than 3 years, or both."

Of course, at this point, we are all holding our collective breath on that, right? I mean, if they fined and locked up every politician who violated ethics laws, there wouldn't be enough people left on Capitol Hill to keep doing nothing at taxpayer expense.

Oh, and remember that little kerfuffle George got himself into regarding his magical metamorphosis of the Office of Political Affairs? It turns out the Obama administration pulled off an even more astonishing David Copperfield-esque act of prestidigitation. Where Bush simply transformed the purpose of the OPA, Obama made the entire OPA staff disappear and then reappear as part of the Democratic National Committee - who just happen to be the ones who organized and promoted that March 7 White House dinner for all of those evil Wall Street "fat-cats" we talked about in the beginning.

Don't you just love it when a jog around the ethics violation track comes full circle?

Sources:

"Hatch Act - Government Organization and Employees"

Josh Gerstein, "Donor meeting at White House draws fire", Politico

Ryan J. Reilly, "Report: Bush White House Violated Law By Using Gov't Resources To Support GOP in '06 Elections", Talking Points Memo

"Investigation of Political Activities by White House and Federal Agency Officials During the 2006 Midterm Elections", Scribd.

Alexis Simendinger, "White House Says Obama Fundraising Appeal Not Illegal", Real Clear Politics

Jim Geraghty, "The Political Use of the White House 'Just Got More Interesting'", National Review Online

"Report: Obama Films Campaign Ad in White House, Possibly Violating FEC Laws?", Real Clear Politics

"DNC Fundraising Events in the White House: Coffees, Overnights and Other Events", Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee

"Federal Election Campaign Laws", FEC.gov

Peter Wallsten, "Obama Pushing behind scenes to win over big-dollar donors" Washington Post

Elizabeth Williamson, "Obama Slams 'Fat Cat' Bankers", Wall Street Journal