Democratic presidential candidate Martin O’Malley is taking aim at rival Hillary Clinton’s legally suspect coordination with a group supporting her candidacy, reviving criticism of an arrangement that experts say pushes the boundaries of campaign finance law.
O’Malley, the former governor of Maryland, is pledging to close an apparent loophole in campaign finance law that has allowed Clinton’s campaign to directly coordinate with a Super PAC called Correct the Record.
Clinton supporters say that prohibitions on Super PAC coordination do not apply to Correct the Record because it conducts online communications free of charge, as opposed to paid advertising or other direct expenditures on the candidate’s behalf.
O’Malley takes direct aim at that arrangement in a campaign finance reform proposal unveiled on Thursday. An outline of the proposal demands an end to what O’Malley calls the "internet exemption."
The provision "allows some outside groups that engage in political activity online
to coordinate directly with campaigns," the outline says. In a post on the website Medium detailing his proposals, O’Malley appeared to take a shot directly at Clinton’s arrangement with Correct the Record.
"Any candidate who calls for a constitutional amendment should be equally committed to aggressively [sic] enforcement of our existing campaign finance laws," he wrote. "That includes prohibiting campaigns from coordinating with their Super PACs on fundraising and Internet advertising."
The Clinton campaign announced in May that it would directly coordinate with Correct the Record, which promotes Clinton’s record and policy platform and attacks those of her opponents, including, increasingly, her Democratic primary rivals.
Correct the Record is a project of David Brock, the Democratic operative behind other major pro-Clinton groups such as nonprofit opposition research firm Media Matters for America and Super PAC American Bridge.
Correct the Record was initially an American Bridge project, but spun off in May in order to enable its direct coordination with the Clinton campaign.
The arrangement immediately raised red flags among legal experts and campaign finance reform advocates.
"The Internet exemption wasn’t meant for a political committee to raise unlimited money in coordination with a candidate," Larry Noble, senior counsel at the Campaign Legal Center, told the Washington Post in May. "It was meant for bloggers. It was not intended to be this massive operation where you are outsourcing your rapid response team."
The Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust, a conservative watchdog group run by former U.S. Attorney Matthew Whitaker, said in a Federal Election Commission complaint that Correct the Record’s work violates prohibitions on contributions by a Super PAC to a campaign.
"The relevant question is whether [Correct the Record’s] funding an entire research and rapid response staff working in full coordination with the Clinton Campaign is something of value to the Clinton Campaign, and as such, constitutes an illegal in-kind contribution. It is beyond doubt that it does," FACT said.
The complaint alleged that Correct the Record is essentially running a shadow Clinton campaign, doing things that a campaign generally does, but with a war chest unencumbered by contribution limits that restrict campaign fundraising.
The group "could save space in their press releases, as there is a simpler term for a ‘fully coordinated research and rapid response team’—that term is ‘campaign staff,’" FACT wrote.
Correct the Record has denied that its work amounts to an in-kind contribution. It compares its online advocacy to press releases issued by party organs on behalf of their candidates.
"This is actually very clear cut and the FEC has repeatedly dismissed allegations regarding coordination of Internet communications," Adrienne Watson, the group’s communications director, told Politico.
In addition to its legal complications, the arrangement between Correct the Record and the Clinton campaign, neither of which returned requests for comment on this story, complicates the candidate’s messaging on campaign finance reform.
She has pledged to "curb the outsized influence of big money in American politics, bring sunshine to secret spending, and institute real reform to raise the voices of regular voters."
Asked about the disconnect between that rhetoric and her apparent exploitation of the post-Citizens United campaign finance landscape, an anonymous Clinton campaign official told New York Magazine that she will use all of the tools at her disposal even if she would rather political spending be more restricted.
"There is too much at stake for our future for Democrats to unilaterally disarm," the campaign official said.
However, Clinton has not just used tools available to other campaigns; she has arguably pressed the boundaries of campaign finance law more than any other 2016 candidate.
"If Correct the Record gets away with what it is trying to do, what’s left that a campaign can’t outsource?" asked CLC senior counsel Paul S. Ryan in a May interview with Politico.
O’Malley prodded Clinton without mentioning her by name in his post. "There’s a reason my campaign is not raking in dollars from fossil fuel companies or hedge funds," he wrote.