Sakonnet Times letter on PCC campaign finance

Just in case you don't get the Sakonnet Times, here's my letter to the editor about the Portsmouth Concerned Citizens and their refusal to disclose campaign finance info, which just appeared in this week's paper:

To the editor:
Did the Portsmouth Concerned Citizens (PCC) violate Rhode Island campaign finance laws? We don't know, because PCC, Inc. president Larry Fitzmorris won't answer questions from concerned citizens. Here's the backstory.

The August, 2007 PCC newsletter featured a story on "achievements" of the past year, claiming that they "supported election" of four candidates for the Town Council and three for the School Committee: Karen Gleason, Huck Little, Dennis Canario, Peter McIntyre, Doug Wilkey, Jamie Heaney, and Mike Buddemeyer. I sent an e-mail to all those named, asking for their comments.

According to Jamie Heaney, "I believe this was the first election that the PCC 'endorsed' candidates. The support of which they speak, was in the form of that endorsement, which was probably circulated to several thousand residents of the town."

Now let me be clear about what I'm questioning here. I am in no way implying that the PCC's endorsement would influence these elected officials. All who replied were quite clear on this, saying much the same as Dennis Canario, who responded, "I have always based my decisions on what I believe is in the best interest for the town as a whole, and NOT for any particluar group. I do try and do my homework and base my decisions accordingly."

The issue I am raising is one of campaign contributions. According to the PCC newsletter in question, from October, 2006, in an article called "The Endorsement Process," "The endorsed candidates are listed in this Newsletter, which has been mailed to all PCC members, as well as other interested voters." I forwarded all this information to RI director of campaign finance, Richard Thornton, who said that if the costs of distributing that endorsement to non-members exceeded a certain threshold, it triggers a reporting requirement. Was the PCC in violation? We don't know, because Mr. Fitzmorris won't say what they spent.

When questioned Monday night about the expenditures, he said, "We have that data," but declined to provide it, saying "we're a private organization, and you're asking us questions about our private expenditures." When pressed, he responded, "We're not obligated to release to you our internal financial operations." I've forwarded his comments to the RI Board of Elections to see if they can pursue the issue.

In the grand scheme of things, you might say this is merely a technical violation, even if their spending did go over the limit. But campaign finance laws exist to insure fair and open elections, something I'm sure the PCC supports. And it is ironic -- and telling -- that an organization which talks all the time about openness and transparency refuses to show any.

As Mr. Fitzmorris himself said in their May newsletter: "What we do not know we are unable to challenge. Given the opportunity, the ethically challenged will chose the closet for decisions that hazard the public good."

John G. McDaid
Portsmouth

Comments

"We have that data," but declined to provide it, saying "we're a private organization, and you're asking us questions about our private expenditures." When pressed, he responded, "We're not obligated to release to you our internal financial operations."

Why would anyone have a problem with this information, or even make an issue of it? Does it matter who endorsed who with contributions? I mean if it comes out of the pockets of citizens, who willingly want to give to someone isn't it their right ,and their business? This to me is no different than one donating to a charity, any charity of their own choice(why must I tell YOU,or anyone else,who I choose to give my money to?) Why should Mr. Fitzmoriss have to say what they spent, what citizens of this town donated for it? just to please YOUR curiosity? Whatever the total sum may be, it did not come out of your pocket,or anyone else's that was not interested,or could not afford to do so.
Unlike,and NO comparison to the(citizens) taxpayers money(s) being spent ,and used behind our backs, and a VERY large sum of it ,I may add, without ANY knowledge of where it was spent.

"Now let me be clear about what I'm questioning here. I am in no way implying that the PCC's endorsement would influence these elected officials."

Sure you are...what possible other reason(s) would you have to even try to investigate this,or stir the pot? This is an insult to any, intelligent adult, rational,human being, with a brain,and mind ,of their own. No one was brain washed, and all of the officials will be elected by the people who agree with what they stand for, Nobody was influenced by anyone(and if your claim is that they were not)than(again) what is the problem?

Why aren't you more concerned about,and putting your energy into finding out where our hard earned money( a large sum of it) is being spent, or I should say over-spent! Maybe because you are so consumed with bashing the PCC, that you don't care about it...Put your energy into something more helpful to this town ,and its citizens as a whole.

I don't care who, how much,or how many(endorsements), as long as it comes(legally) from people who willing WANT to donate for a cause,or a person ,that they truly believe has the, best interests,and intent ,for my town. But I'm very suspicious of anyone who would question those (legal) rights to do so...with their own money.
"According to Jamie Heaney, "I believe this was the first election that the PCC 'endorsed' candidates. The support of which they speak, was in the form of that endorsement, which was probably circulated to several thousand residents of the town."
Another (legal)option... what if they(PCC) put out(made copies) of flyers, that could easily be distributed into peoples doors...what does that matter? Everybody votes for who they want elected, regardless of endorsements. I get tons of them in my doors at election time,who the hell is going to question, who, how much...or whatever. Easy enough to throw them in the trash.

P.S. No amount of money gets anyone elected, if the majority votes against them.
I will be watching(closely) the new "O" team of, Oprah,and Obama, She has an audience of 8 1/2 million people,and more money than God...Even though...I'm willing to say right now that he doesn't Win! Personally(if anyone cares) I really like the man, and I believe that someday(with more experience under his belt) he could be the President, but not this time,and not with the very unstable conditions we are facing right now. Now would I be willing to tell you,or anyone else, who I will endorse/support? Not on your life! That is my own personal,private choice, Oh...and its legal too!

Hi, Stormie...
Why would anyone have a problem with this information, or even make an issue of it? Does it matter who endorsed who with contributions?
Are you seriously questioning the importance of campaign finance disclosure? If you are, then this conversation can serve no further purpose, and I suggest you contact your state representatives and try to get them to change state law, and speak with our congressional delegation about the Federal Elections Commission.

I mean if it comes out of the pockets of citizens, who willingly want to give to someone isn't it their right ,and their business? This to me is no different than one donating to a charity, any charity of their own choice(why must I tell YOU,or anyone else,who I choose to give my money to?) Why should Mr. Fitzmoriss have to say what they spent, what citizens of this town donated for it? just to please YOUR curiosity?
Actually, under both Federal and state law, this is most emphatically not like donating to charity. Please acquaint yourself with the RI Board of Elections Campaign Finance laws. Mr. Fitzmorris must, by law, report expenditures made supporting the election of candidates outside PCC members if those exceed a specific amount.

"Now let me be clear about what I'm questioning here. I am in no way implying that the PCC's endorsement would influence these elected officials."
Sure you are...what possible other reason(s) would you have to even try to investigate this,or stir the pot? This is an insult to any, intelligent adult, rational,human being, with a brain,and mind ,of their own. No one was brain washed, and all of the officials will be elected by the people who agree with what they stand for, Nobody was influenced by anyone(and if your claim is that they were not)than(again) what is the problem?

Let me get this straight. The PCC goes looking for violations of the law and you applaud them. I do the same thing, and you accuse me of lying about my motives. That seems inconsistent.

Why aren't you more concerned about,and putting your energy into finding out where our hard earned money( a large sum of it) is being spent, or I should say over-spent! Maybe because you are so consumed with bashing the PCC, that you don't care about it...Put your energy into something more helpful to this town ,and its citizens as a whole.
If I had any suspicion that overspending was happening, sure, I'd investigate. I've read the memos provided to Mr. Fitzmorris by the Town, and I find them to be a reasonable explanation. Yes, I'll follow the audit, and will look at the results quite closely. But open and fair elections are also important to the town, as are campaign finance laws.

I don't care who, how much,or how many(endorsements), as long as it comes(legally) from people who willing WANT to donate for a cause,or a person ,that they truly believe has the, best interests,and intent ,for my town. But I'm very suspicious of anyone who would question those (legal) rights to do so...with their own money.
See the RIGL on this, please. It is just not the case that you can give anything you want to anybody. Are you suspicious of me asking the PCC to obey the law? Should they be exempt from the law just because you support their agenda?

Another (legal)option... what if they(PCC) put out(made copies) of flyers, that could easily be distributed into peoples doors...what does that matter? Everybody votes for who they want elected, regardless of endorsements. I get tons of them in my doors at election time,who the hell is going to question, who, how much...or whatever. Easy enough to throw them in the trash.
Absolutely, that's exactly what I'd do with them. But if they spent more than the allowable maximum to print and distribute them, then by law they would have to report that to the state.

The Board of Elections is not playing Big Brother here; they are simply requiring groups to document and disclose the money they pump into elections. Arguing, as you do here, that concealing that information is acceptable runs counter to both law and common sense.

Regards.
-j

"Mr. Fitzmorris must, by law, report expenditures made supporting the election of candidates outside PCC members if those exceed a specific amount."

"But if they spent more than the allowable maximum to print and distribute them, then by law they would have to report that to the state."

First of all where is your proof,and facts, that they have exceeded a specific amount? Are you suggesting that it may be some paper,and(maybe) stamps?
You don't know any more than that.
Second...Mr. Fitzmoriss is well aware of the laws, much more so than you are.
For you to think otherwise "then this conversation can serve no further purpose". Too stupid for words.

"Are you suspicious of me asking the PCC to obey the law? Should they be exempt from the law just because you support their agenda"?

Nobody should be exempt from the law, and nobody should be assumed guilty of breaking the law before there is 100% proof,and FACT, to base such accusations on. You pride yourself on knowing the FACTS, ha! yet you have none,and you are just pissed off because you can't get any dirt on Larry,and the PCC...Keep digging! You are really reaching, this is so rediculous, its laughable. and Yes very suspicious of you. Then again...you are just a drop in the bucket, flash in the pan blogger...how many members are you up to now? and your wife doesn't count. I see the same 3-4 people commenting here, friends, or family?

Everyone knows what you are up to,and why...Hang it up...your making a fool of yourself.

Hi, Stormie...
I freely admit that I do not have the facts that would prove the PCC exceeded the limit. That was exactly what I was asking Mr. Fitzmorris to provide, but he declined. Without those facts, we can't know. Why would the PCC be afraid to tell the truth and clear the air?

What facts do you have supporting your assertion that Mr. Fitzmorris is "well aware of the laws?" Did he talk to you about this issue? What did he say?

My comment on the conversation serving no purpose was in reference to your mistaken belief that campaign contributions are (or should be) as unregulated as charitable giving. Go look at the links I provided for the facts.

Once again, let me explain the difference between readers and posters. You are free to click the SiteMeter link at the bottom of any page to see my stats, I make those freely available. I average a bit under 100 visits each day, and I don't believe that people come every day, so the reasonable inference is that I have a core readership of several hundred, and a look-in audience in the high hundreds. A respectable total of just under 20,000 visits since I turned on tracking in November, 2006. Those are the facts.

And if you think my wife doesn't count, I suggest you say that to her face, rather than hiding behind your anonymous screen name.

But, I guess, secrecy is just SOP for the PCC and their less-than-well-informed apologists.

Cheers.
-j

"What facts do you have supporting your assertion that Mr. Fitzmorris is "well aware of the laws?" Did he talk to you about this issue? What did he say?"

Everyone who knows Mr. Fitzmoriss knows that he is aware of the law,and a law abiding citizen of this town. As I've said before, He isn't going to do anything,or say anything,without knowing the facts, he does his homework. do you honestly think he would be putting ALL his, hard work, time,and energy, into this, without knowing what he is doing? HE is not out to make a fool of himself, and is always well educated on all of the issues at hand.

"I freely admit that I do not have the facts that would prove the PCC exceeded the limit." My point exactly!
"Without those facts, we can't know." Key word here is :We...don't assume that just because he doesn't volunteer the information to YOU...that WE don't know already... "Why would the PCC be afraid to tell the truth and clear the air?" Who's air? Yours? what a joke...you still don't get it, do you...You are not welcomed into the PCC, you are a trouble maker, a person who has made up their mind that everything about THE PORTSMOUTH CONCERNED CITIZENS, is wrong,and just bad(all the way around)without, real,true, FACTS to base these accusations on, You fail to admit,and realize that these people you are bashing,and accusing, are ,all,and only, good citizens(taxpayers) of this town,just like yourself.

So there are no secrets, just information that is more than likely kept from you because YOU have proven yourself as a foe,many times over. Sorry John but you are not on the list of important things,or issues, to deal with by the PCC ,or Mr. Fitzmoriss...He has much more important things to do than to pay attention to a blog, I'm sure any extra time he has is more precious to him than that.

"And if you think my wife doesn't count, I suggest you say that to her face, rather than hiding behind your anonymous screen name." Wow...them there are fighting words,and fortunately for you, I'm not,and never will be a violent person. I only meant that your wife didn't count because she is partial. You really are overly sensitive.
Yes, I see where you have a lot of readers visiting(merely out of first time,curiosity?)...but also that only 4-5 actual members(the same people) who comment(and agree with you)...ever wonder why that is?

When you can no longer afford to live in your home(sewers,plumbers,pumps) and higher taxes. And you finally realize that only ,doctors,lawyers, and millionaire celebrities,will be the only ones able to afford to, and your son will not be able to live in the house that he grew up in, with all of his family history in it, even if he's earning $100,000 a year...maybe then(and only then) you will appreciate what the PCC,and Mr. Fitzmoriss,were trying to accomplish all along. Unfortunately(at this rate)It will then be too late.
Open your eyes,and your ears...for the sake of this town,your town,your sons town,and my town. We are all in the same boat!

Arguing back and forth about petty issues, with so much work to be done, is pointless,and a waste of energy. We all need positive energy...and speaking of energy...Got WIND? Yes indeed! I'am with you on the Wind Turbines!

A life long,law abiding, Portsmouth citizen.

~S

Hi, Stormie...
An organization which claims the moral high ground should not tolerate even the appearance of impropriety. That Mr. Fitzmorris cares more for the secrecy of the PCC's numbers than dispelling suspicion is the crux of the issue.

Ensuring open and fair elections is not some petty, irrelevant distraction from more important matters. Your attempt to make it seem so is a political tactic. We are a nation of laws, and I would hope the PCC treats them with respect. We shall see.

I'm very happy that we agree on the Wind Tubine issue.

Kind Regards.
-j

No mention on your blog of the Tiverton school teachers strike eh John?
They are now demanding pay for the day they went on an ILLEGAL strike.

John -" We are a nation of laws, and I would hope the PCC treats them with respect."

I guess when school teachers break the law,it obviously isn't blog worthy news to you.

Hi, Stormie...
So you want to hold Tiverton school teachers to the law but not the PCC?

Cheers.
-j

You want to hold the PCC to the law, without even knowing if any laws were broken, NO proof,NO facts....Yet NO mention of the FACT that the Tiverton teachers DID break the law,and now want to get payed for it, those are the FACTS.

I'm not excluding the PCC from the law, or anyone else. But YOU have no proof that any laws were broken by the PCC. So..you make serious accusations,and run off at the mouth without facts(when it comes to the PCC), but where the facts are present(when its the teachers) you choose to ignore it in your blog. How obvious as to where you are coming from. I guess you feel that Teachers are above the law.

I don't have to say anymore on this subject...it is very clear,and very obvious.

Stormie:

You said, "No mention on your blog of the Tiverton ... I guess when school teachers break the law ..."

A search of this blog (easily done using the handy "search box at the top of the page) reveals that NOTHING in Tiverton has EVER been covered in this blog. If you want to use the fact that John didn't cover Tiverton as proof of something, you might as weel also use the fact that John didn't cover the Montalbano / ethics mess as proof that John doesn't care about conflict of interest laws.

This is typical false logic as follows:

A=B. {arbitrary false premise}
John blogged A. {True}
John didn't blog B. {True}
Therefore, John must not think A=B. {False conclusion due to false premise}

In effect:

John must blog every story about laws to prove he wants all laws upheld. {arbitrary false premise}
John blogged a Portsmouth law story. {True}
John didn't blog a Tiverton law story. {True}
Therefore, John must not think all laws should be upheld. {False conclusion due to false premise}

Please. If you want to make some point, fine. Please don't do it using an unrelated premise. We see too much of this all the time on CNN/FOX/MSNBC/etc.

Best regards.