OneNation Am

=note several orgs similar names, one rove, one mcconnell?==<div>judd</div><div> 12 22</div><div>andrew Ross Sorkin speaks with FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried during the New York Times DealBook Summit on November 30, 2022 (Photo by Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images)</div>Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, better known as SBF, burst onto the political scene and cast himself as the financial savior of the Democratic Party. In May, SBF said he was prepared to spend <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="blank" href="https://substack.com/redirect/ad032cf6-4844-471b-baff-aabfb0d14310?j=eyJ1IjoiN3ltancifQ.i0HJl3aVWG8sHp566T-pebMssFGKcgvxVOFLuZyEDpw">up to $1 billion to help Democrats</a> win in 2022 and 2024. Like many of SBF's claims, that turned out to be bluster. Public campaign finance filings show that SBF spent just $41 million in the 2022 midterm elections. Much of that was spent propping up unsuccessful Democratic primary candidates, including <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="blank" href="https://substack.com/redirect/91273236-e501-41fd-87b4-326284a3d61e?j=eyJ1IjoiN3ltancifQ.i0HJl3aVWG8sHp566T-pebMssFGKcgvxVOFLuZyEDpw">$11 million to Carrick Flynn</a>, who lost a Congressional primary in Oregon. Still, SBF made substantial donations to Democratic Super PACs, including $6 million to the House Majority PAC, the Super PAC affiliated with Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). The spending made SBF one of the top two donors to Democrats in the 2022 cycle. (Billionaire George Soros technically spent more, but most of it was donated to Soros' own PAC and not distributed.) When FTX collapsed and declared bankruptcy, the media portrayed it as a serious blow to Democrats. <div class="yiv2450608047captioned-image-container-static" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); line-height: 26px; margin: 32px auto;"><table width="100%" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" class="yiv2450608047image-wrapper"><tbody><tr><td style="word-break: normal; text-align: center;" /><td align="left" width="1456" class="yiv2450608047content" style="word-break: normal; text-align: center;">[gfx]</td><td style="word-break: normal; text-align: center;" /></tr></tbody></table></div>Even based on public campaign finance reports, this was an oversimplification. SBF donated to Republicans favorable to crypto, including Senator-elect Katie Britt (R-AL), Senator John Hoeven (R-ND), and Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-AK). SBF also donated to the National Republican Campaign Committee, which supports the election of Republicans to the House. Further, another FTX executive, Ryan Salame, publicly donated about $23 million in the midterms, and almost all of it went to Republicans. FTX itself donated to <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="blank" href="https://substack.com/redirect/ad3246a5-78a1-4de5-be99-7d46f2a1dcbe?j=eyJ1IjoiN3ltancifQ.i0HJl3aVWG8sHp566T-pebMssFGKcgvxVOFLuZyEDpw">a slew of Republican Super PACs</a> just before the election, including $1 million to the Senate Leadership Fund (SLF), $750,000 to Congressional Leadership Fund (CLF), and 150,000 to the American Patriots PAC. These donations would have almost certainly required the approval of SBF, the company's then-CEO.Now, SBF has admitted that his image as a top supporter of Democratic candidates was a ruse. After FTX's bankruptcy, in <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="blank" href="https://substack.com/redirect/f7ac2cd1-57d3-410d-a240-44f7b3b5d213?j=eyJ1IjoiN3ltancifQ.i0HJl3aVWG8sHp566T-pebMssFGKcgvxVOFLuZyEDpw">a phone interview</a> with crypto content creator Tiffany Fong, SBF said that he gave just as much money to Republicans in the 2022 cycle. SBF just made sure that those donations were secret. <blockquote style="border-left: 4px solid rgb(237, 118, 50); margin: 20px 0px;">I donated about the same amount to both parties this year. That is not generally known because, despite Citizens United being literally the highest-profile Supreme Court case of the decade and the thing everyone talks about when they talk about campaign finance, for some reason, in practice, no one can possibly fathom the idea that someone in practice actually gave dark. All my Republican donations were dark. And the reason was not for regulatory reasons. It's just reporters freak the fuck out if you donate to a Republican. They are all secretly liberal and didn't want to have that fight. So I made all the Republican ones dark.</blockquote>If SBF is telling the truth, it would make him one of the Republicans' top donors. Since much of SBF's spending on behalf of Democrats went to failed Democratic primary candidates, it's possible that SBF spent significantly more helping Republicans than Democrats in the general election.SBF blames "reporters" for his deception, but he chose to hold himself out as someone who was willing to spend $1 billion to elect Democrats. That generated an enormous amount of media coverage and raised the profile of FTX. All the while, he was engaged in the much more mundane task of buying influence from both parties. How did SBF do it? The top Super PAC for Republican Senate candidates was Mitch McConnell's SLF. But the largest donor, by far, to the SLF is One Nation. Through September 30, 2022, One Nation donated $53.5 million to the SLF. Like the SLF, One Nation is run by Steven Law, a former Chief of Staff to McConnell. But unlike the SLF, One Nation is organized as a 501(c)4 non-profit organization and can keep its donors secret. One Nation can collect unlimited donations from people like SBF, keep their identities secret, and then pass the money on to the SLF. The top Super PAC for Republican House candidates, CLF, also has an affiliated non-profit, the American Action Network, that operates the same way. The truth about SBF's political spending is an example of his duplicity. But, more importantly, it illustrates how the public has no idea who is actually funding candidates in the United States. The largest sums of money spent on elections come from anonymous donors. Making disclosure effectively optional allows unscrupulous individuals like SBF to manipulate public perception.The <a rel="nofollow noopener noreferrer" target="blank" href="https://substack.com/redirect/6769a0b0-7645-4b64-ba28-0d2f568d3fc5?j=eyJ1IjoiN3ltancifQ.i0HJl3aVWG8sHp566T-pebMssFGKcgvxVOFLuZyEDpw">DISCLOSE Act</a> is one solution to this problem. It would require "organizations spending money in elections – including super PACs and 501(c)(4) dark money groups – to promptly disclose donors who have given $10,000 or more during an election cycle." If the DISCLOSE Act was law, SBF's donations to all candidates would be public. The bill would also "crack down on the use of shell corporations to hide the identity of the donor by requiring companies spending money in elections to disclose their true owners."The Senate brought the DISCLOSE Act up for a vote in September. All Democratic members voted for it, and all Republican members opposed it. Since the bill required 60 votes to pass, it failed. "The American people are fed up with dark money influence campaigns that rig their government against them and stymie their priorities," Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), who sponsored the legislation, said. "The DISCLOSE Act would shine a light on special interest spending to neutralize its toxic effect, giving Americans’ voices a chance to be heard.  Republicans heeded the wishes of dark money donors today, but the fight to pass this bill isn’t over."<div>=</div>=<span class="tablepress-table-description tablepress-table-description-id-129" style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; clear: both; display: block;">Figures are from either January 1, 2017 through July 29, 2018 (full cycle) or June 5, 2018 through July 29, 2018. Numbers include broadcast television. “Full” means the outside group discloses its sources of funding to the FEC. (Kantar Media/CMAG with analysis by the Wesleyan Media Project) In Senate races, non-disclosing organizations accounted for about 51 percent of ads purchased by pro-GOP groups this cycle. About 38 percent of the ads purchased by pro-Democrat organizations in Senate races this cycle have come from non-disclosing groups, according to the study.The Senate Majority PAC, a super PAC that supports Democratic candidates running for Senate seats, was the top ad spender in House, Senate and gubernatorial races since June 5, the study found. SMP, which has accepted money from dark money groups this cycle, spent roughly $5.1 million on nearly 20,000 ads in races nationwide from June 5 to July 29.Other top political ad spenders since June included the conservative Florida Grown PC, which spent about $3.3 million on nearly 8,000 ads, and the conservative One Nation, a dark money nonprofit tied to Senate Republican leadership, which spent about $3 million on about 9,500 ads.Despite its considerable spending, One Nation has not reported any of its spending to the Federal Election Commission (FEC). This is because the group’s ads are framed as “educational” or “issue” ads — like <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yQ4QCTYaHYw" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">this one</a> that doesn’t tell viewers how to vote, but asks them to “Tell Senator Heller to keep fighting for us and to improve V.A. nursing homes.”Such ads only have to reported to the FEC 30 days before a primary election or 60 days before a general election. As OpenSecrets <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/11/as-fec-window-opened-subjects-of-dark-money-issue-ads-became-targets-for-defeat/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">has reported in the past</a>, dark money groups use these reporting windows to flood TV stations with ads that won’t be reported to the FEC so that the group can claim the expenditures as part of its social welfare function activities when it files its tax returns with the IRS.One Nation certainly isn’t alone. Liberal and conservative groups — like Majority Forward, which supports Senate Democrats, and the Koch-flagship group Americans for Prosperity — have spent millions of dollars on ads, while reporting almost none of it to the FEC.As more groups take advantage of this loophole, less spending by dark money groups is actually reported to the FEC. In the 2018 cycle, dark money groups have reported $39.5 million to the FEC compared to $44.1 million at this point in 2014. However, as the WMP/CRP <a href="http://mediaproject.wesleyan.edu/releases/june-2018/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; box-sizing: inherit; max-height: 1e+06px; background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial;">report showed in June</a> — when the same trend was evident — dark money spending was up both in terms of volume and percentage of overall ads run by outside groups.  <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=C90016262&cycle=2016">http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=C90016262&cycle=2016</a>no donors listed
<table class="tablesorter tablesorter-default" id="tab" role="grid" style="border-collapse: collapse; border-spacing: 0px; width: 629px; font-stretch: normal; font-size: 10pt; line-height: 18px; font-family: Arial, sans-serif; color: rgb(51, 51, 51); background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); margin: 10px 0px 15px;"><tbody aria-live="polite" aria-relevant="all"><tr role="row" class="even" /><tr role="row" class="odd"><td style="background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">Hassan, Maggie</td><td class="center" style="text-align: center; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">D</td><td class="center" style="text-align: center; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">NH</td><td style="background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">Senate</td><td class="number" style="text-align: right; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">$326,717</td><td class="number" style="text-align: right; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">$0</td><td class="number" style="text-align: right; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">$326,717</td><td class="center" style="text-align: center; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;" /><td class="center" style="text-align: center; background-color: rgb(247, 247, 247); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;" /></tr><tr role="row" class="even"><td style="background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">McGinty, Katie</td><td class="center" style="text-align: center; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">D</td><td class="center" style="text-align: center; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">PA</td><td style="background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">Senate</td><td class="number" style="text-align: right; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">$128,586</td><td class="number" style="text-align: right; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">$0</td><td class="number" style="text-align: right; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;">$128,586</td><td class="center" style="text-align: center; background-color: rgb(239, 239, 239); border-bottom: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); padding: 6px 3px; vertical-align: top;" /></tr></tbody></table>
<div class="entry-content" style="margin: 5px 0px; word-wrap: break-word;">Ad buyer information reported for One Nation ads are even more baffling. Several One Nation documents show that either broadcast stations or ad buying agents have been mixing up the nonprofit group One Nation with One Nation PAC, which has no relation to One Nation and has purchased no ads in 2016.In this particular ad purchase record for <a href="https://publicfiles.fcc.gov/api/manager/download/51388908-cc07-e84d-a108-fdfd5be95ad5/283c3faf-9c92-4923-9df1-eb651c36f893.pdf" target="blank" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">WMUR</a> in New Hampshire from last month, the contract document lists One Nation PAC as the advertiser but the NAB Form identifies One Nation as the organization that will use the broadcast time.<div id="attachment_16331" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="margin: 10px auto; border: none; float: left; width: 518px;"><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Figure4-1.png" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;"><img class="wp-image-16331 size-full" src="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Figure4-1.png" alt="Figure4-1" width="512" height="138" srcset="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Figure4-1.png 512w, http://www.opensecrets.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Figure4-1-300x81.png 300w" sizes="(max-width: 512px) 100vw, 512px" style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; margin: 0px;" /></a>The contract lists One Nation PAC as the advertiser.</div><div id="attachment_16332" class="wp-caption aligncenter" style="margin: 10px auto; border: none; float: left; width: 331px;"><a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Figure4-2.png" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;"><img class="wp-image-16332 " src="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Figure4-2.png" alt="Figure4-2" width="325" height="35" style="border: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px; margin: 0px;" /></a>The NAB form lists One Nation as the organization to use the broadcast time.</div>         As similar as they sound, there’s an important difference between the two. One Nation is a tax-exempt 501(c)(4) nonprofit that has a legal privilege to keep its donors secret. One Nation PAC, on the other hand, is a <a href="https://www.opensecrets.org/527s/types.php" target="blank" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Carey Committee</a>, a hybrid that can contribute to candidates as well as make independent expenditures. But the PAC must disclose its donors.Vermont’s <a href="https://publicfiles.fcc.gov/tv-profile/wcax-tv/political-files/2016/non-candidate-issue-ads/61c261c7-f16a-fda2-0fb3-7b1943f3321c/" target="blank" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">WCAX</a> consistently lists One Nation as the advertiser in all its documents; but it uploaded all its One Nation filings under a folder named One Nation PAC on the FCC website.WCAX General Sales Manager Nick Hasenecz, who files the reports for the station, told OpenSecrets Blog he wasn’t aware that the political action committee and the nonprofit group were separate entities. The station changed the folder’s name to One Nation after the conversation with OpenSecrets Blog.But WMUR and WCAX aren’t alone in mixing up the two groups.Because the database isn’t sortable, it’s difficult to check the whole archive, but an analysis shows that at least 10 different stations have listed One Nation and One Nation PAC interchangeably on their NAB forms, records of requests and contracts.“The reason for this [missing and inaccurate information] is that the stations feel absolutely no pressure to fill in all the required information accurately,” McGehee said.Under current rules, broadcast licensees have the sole burden of “due diligence” to report complete and accurate information. But because of the lack of precise definition for “due diligence,” stations can simply say they “asked” sponsors or ad-buying agencies for missing information but failed to get an answer.An FCC spokesman said the agency conducts periodic audits to ensure compliance with its rules and also reviews complaints filed with the FCC.The agency usually issues warnings to stations that have failed to comply with the rules. Last month, a Florida radio station WQBQ (AM) was <a href="https://apps.fcc.gov/edocs_public/attachmatch/DA-16-922A1.pdf" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">fined $15,000</a> by the FCC for failing to include required information in a public file.However, McGeehee says fines and warnings don’t happen often enough and aren’t sufficient.When the Campaign Legal Center and Sunlight Foundation filed complaints against TV stations in 2014, the FCC responded immediately with letters of inquiry to each of the stations and issued a statement claiming to take the matters seriously. However, the complaints still have not been resolved.“It seems reasonable to assume that FCC is not making reasonable effort to provide the important information to the public,” McGehee said.The devil’s in the details
McGehee said easy access to accurate political ad buy information is especially critical since the Citizens United decision in 2010 because sometimes that’s the only way to track huge amounts of dark money spending in elections.Federal Election Commission rules allow 501(c) groups to spend millions without disclosing their activities to the agency as long as the ads run more than 30 days before a primary or 60 days before a general election. Political nonprofits have<a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/11/as-fec-window-opened-subjects-of-dark-money-issue-ads-became-targets-for-defeat/" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">deliberately avoided spending</a> within the window to avoid filing reports with the FEC.One Nation’s ad buy records compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics show that the dark money group has spent tens of millions of dollars already this election — a fact that can be partially gleaned from its website.One Nation has already spent <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/us/politics/souring-on-donald-trump-republicans-pour-money-into-senate-races.html" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">at least $25 million</a> in 2016, but the FEC’s database shows its outlays as a little over $200,000, because it only began reporting its spending to that agency <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/detail.php?cmte=C90016262&cycle=2016" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">two weeks ago</a>.The Campaign Legal Center, along with Common Cause, the Sunlight Foundation and the Benton Foundation, filed more complaints this week against several broadcasters across the nation that have failed to comply with the rules by leaving out important information or reporting false information on their political ad records.In its new <a href="http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/document/whos-behind-political-ad" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">report</a>, CLC called for building a machine-readable standardized filing system, updating the “due diligence” definition to clarify the responsibilities of broadcasters and requiring ad sponsors, under penalty of perjury to provide media outlets with accurate information.</div><footer class="entry-meta" style="line-height: 15px;">
Categories: <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/outside-money/501c-groups/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">501(c) groups</a> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/campaign-finance/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Campaign finance</a> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/politicians-elections/congress/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Congress</a> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/politicians-elections/congressional-committees/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Congressional Committees</a> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/politicians-elections/expenditures/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Expenditures</a> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/outside-money/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Outside Money</a> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/politicians-elections/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Politicians & Elections</a> <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/category/outside-money/super-pacs/" rel="category tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Super PACs</a>

Tags: <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/501c-groups/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">501(c) groups</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/campaign-finance/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">campaign finance</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/fcc/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">fcc</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/federal-communications-commission/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">Federal Communications Commission</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/one-nation/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">One Nation</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/one-nation-pac/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">one nation pac</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/outside-money/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">outside money</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/soo-rin-kim/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">soo rin kim</a>, <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/tag/super-pacs/" rel="tag" style="background-image: initial; background-position: initial; background-size: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; text-decoration: none;">super PACs</a></footer><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/us/politics/souring-on-donald-trump-republicans-pour-money-into-senate-races.html?r=0">http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/08/us/politics/souring-on-donald-trump-republicans-pour-money-into-senate-races.html?r=0</a>...<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="234" data-total-count="3173" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">One Nation and the Senate Leadership Fund reported raising $42 million in August — both an indication of Republicans’ increasing worry about the Senate and White House races and a clear sign that their attacks will be unrelenting.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="321" data-total-count="3494" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">“August is almost always a month where you sit by the phone like the Maytag repairman, waiting for a donor to call,” Mr. Law said. “What was remarkable was not only the fact we could reach donors, but they reached out to us. There was intense interest fueled by the post-convention drop at the top of the ticket.”<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="392" data-total-count="3886" id="story-continues-4" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Groups supporting Democrats have not been silent. The Senate Majority PAC and Majority Forward have spent some $30 million combined on ads in competitive races, election commission records show. Democrats have also been aided by traditional allies: labor unions, environmentalists and supporters of abortion rights. But Republicans’ outside groups remain significantly ahead in ad spending.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="308" data-total-count="4194" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Democrats’ stronger candidate spending narrows some of the gap. Candidates can purchase advertising at a lower rate than PACs and other outside groups. But in exchange, they are subject to fund-raising limits of $2,700 per contributor per election, while outside groups can raise and spend unlimited funds.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="371" data-total-count="4565" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb">Some donors to groups supporting Republican Senate candidates are clearly in the camp that opposes Mr. Trump’s candidacy. For instance, two major Senate Leadership Fund donors — Warren Stephens, an investment banker, and Paul E. Singer, who runs a hedge fund — previously gave $2.5 million each to an anti-Trump super PAC, according to reports filed with the F.E.C.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="362" data-total-count="4927" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Mr. Portman, whose courtly demeanor runs counter to the tenor of his attacks on Mr. Strickland, demonstrates what money and old-fashioned negative advertising can do. He amassed a large campaign fund and turned toward negative campaigning more than a year ago, attacking Mr. Strickland early in 2015 for his support of the Iran nuclear deal and never letting up.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="282" data-total-count="5209" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Republicans tagged Mr. Strickland as “Retread Ted,” turning his age and experience against him and criticizing <a href="http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2016/05/24/Ad-Watch-Chamber-ad-slamming-Strickland-oversimplifies-Ohios-job-loss.html" title="Columbus Dispatch article.">the state of Ohio’s economy</a> on his watch as governor. Mr. Strickland has not been able to emerge from the barrage to redefine his candidacy in a more positive light.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="223" data-total-count="5432" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Mr. Portman has had other advantages: a giant grass-roots team with over 1,000 college interns; the support of the popular sitting governor, John Kasich; and a strong focus on issues like the state’s opioid abuse problem.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="247" data-total-count="5679" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">But the piles of money and negative ads have clearly put Mr. Portman in a commanding position. Last month, the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/08/29/democrats-delay-ad-spending-on-ohio-senate-race/" title="Washington Post article.">said</a> it was holding off on any further spending in Ohio, essentially abandoning Mr. Strickland.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="424" data-total-count="6103" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">While Republicans played a tough offensive game in Ohio, they are racing to play defense in North Carolina as Mr. Burr <a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/article/439132/richard-burr-reelection-campaign-struggles" title="National Review article.">has stumbled</a>. The Senate Leadership Fund just announced an $8 million ad buy in the state. Groups are also spending money in Indiana, where Democrats recently recruited former Senator Evan Bayh to challenge Representative Todd Young for an open Senate seat that seemed safe for Republicans six months ago.<p class="story-body-text story-content" data-para-count="158" data-total-count="6261" id="story-continues-5" style="margin: 0px 0px 1em 75px; line-height: 1.625rem;" times="times" new="new" roman="roman" serif="serif" max-width="max-width" none="none" width="width" px="px" color="color" rgb="rgb" background-color="background-color">Republicans in Florida, Nevada and Missouri can expect additional PAC money for television, digital and mailed advertising, as well as other campaign support...
===
Take, for instance, the ads sponsored this cycle by <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2015/05/roves-new-group-isnt-new-and-that-could-be-the-point/" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">OneNation America</a>, a dark money group whose president Steven Law is a former chief of staff to Sen. <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/politicians/summary.php?cid=N00003389&cycle=2016" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Mitch McConnell</a> (R-Ky.). OneNation advertises itself as a policy-oriented group that focuses on “<a href="http://www.onenationamerica.org/about/" target="_blank" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">persuasion, research and advocacy</a>,” according to its website. It has spent $9.7 million on ads since 2015, according to an OpenSecrets Blog analysis of OneNation’s press releases. These ads aired in Illinois, New Hampshire, Missouri, Nevada, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Iowa, Indiana and Washington D.C. They mentioned Sens. <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=NHS1" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Kelly Ayotte</a> (R-N.H.), <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=MOS1" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Roy Blunt</a> (R-Mo.), <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=NCS2" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Richard Burr</a> (R-N.C.), <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=IAS1" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Chuck Grassley</a> (R-Iowa), <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=ILS2" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Mark Kirk</a> (R-Ill.), <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=OHS2" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Rob Portman</a> (R-Ohio) and <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=PAS1" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Pat Toomey</a> (R-Pa.), and Reps. <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=INS2" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Todd Young</a> (R-Ind.) and Rep. <a href="http://www.opensecrets.org/races/summary.php?cycle=2016&id=NVS2" style="text-decoration: none; background-image: initial; background-attachment: initial; background-size: initial; background-origin: initial; background-clip: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial;">Joe Heck</a> (R-Nev.) in connection with a range of legislation involving Medicare, job creation, school safety, the Supreme Court vacancy, heroin use and other issues.“Tell Senator Toomey to keep fighting for our children and safe schools,” goes one typical OneNation ad. Or “Call Senator Ayotte. Tell her to keep fighting to end the heroin crisis.”Because these ads don’t tell the public to vote for or against anyone, none of this $9.7 million has been reported to the FEC.The twist? Each one of these GOP senators is up for re-election in 2016, and the House members are running for Senate seats. All their races are expected to be tough. And, if history is any guide, 60 days before their primaries, OneNation America is likely to begin running ads on local television stations telling voters to go out and cast their ballots for these same candidates. Only then will the group’s spending show up at the FEC.