Gerlach FEC Report Violations Part III
These articles are re-posted here. I originally wrote and posted them at DailyKos.com. Congressman Gerlach did fire his campaign treasurer after this was publicized. Have they resolved all these issues? That's for them to say. Writing the article about Rick Santorum's joint fundraising committee's issues reminded me that Gerlach had similar problems. I am re-posting my articles here.
This is Part Three of a series detailing serious and careless errors in Congressman Jim Gerlach's FEC reports. Lois Murphy and her intrepid staff have discovered ten significant problems with the Congressman's filings. You can read the FEC Complaint here.
In this segment we'll look at Gerlach's failure to record small contributions and his failure to accurately report small contributions to his campaign.
Incidentally, Gerlach has responded publicly to the Complaint, citing failures by his staff and replacing his campaign Treasurer. I take this as an admission that these accusations are all factual. To date (note, this was December 1, 2005) I haven't seen him contest any of the allegations cited by Murphy.
First let's discuss how reporting of small contributions is done. Federal campaigns must report the total amount of all contributions made. Any contributor who donates $200 or more in any reporting period (every three months) must be identified in the FEC report (unless you're Jim Gerlach).
Small contributors are those giving less than $200 in a reporting period. It's essential for a campaign to record every transaction. Besides being required, it is also basic bookkeeping, accounting, and necessary to insure no single individual goes over the legally allowable maximum of $2100 per election cycle.
Lois Murphy and her staff discovered that Gerlach "failed to maintain an accurate account of small contributions and failed to accurately disclose the total amount of contributions received from donors."
She also found "Gerlach failed to disclose all or some contributions made by individuals in violation of FEC law."
Let's examine the first accusation. All Federal campaigns are required to record the names and addresses of every donor, along with the date of the donation. They are then required to report the total amount of such contributions each quarter. In the Third Quarterly Report for 2005 Gerlach actually said his campaign had a NEGATIVE total of small contributions. They reported a loss of $8,911.21 for that three month period.
Let's see if we can imagine a scenario where a sitting Congressman, in a three month period, actually had a negative cash flow of small contributions..... Did his campaign actually return $8,911.21 more of these donations than they received? If you believe that please step over here for the booth where I'll be selling rights to the Brooklyn Bridge.
In our second citation today we're looking at the segment where Gerlach also failed to report contributions. Gee, do you think there's a pattern of incompetence here?
Committees are required, under Federal law, to report all contributions received in any Quarter exceeding $200. The report requires the disclosure of the individual's name, address, their employer, the date of the contribution, their occupation, the election designation, and the election cycle. For a bit of explanation, let me define what an election cycle is.
An election cycle means the period of time prior to each election. The election in 2004 was an election cycle and the 2006 election is another election cycle. Within the 2006 election cycle a candidate can accept a maximum of $2100 for the primary election and another $2100 for the general election. If a candidate accepts all $4200 at once half of it must be set aside for the subsequent general election and not spent until after the primary.
A Political Action Committee has a maximum contribution of $5000 under these same rules. All PAC's donating to Federal candidates MUST be registered with the FEC in order to contribute to a Federal candidate. Gerlach accepted a $4000 contribution designated for the primary election from Friends of John Perzel. Friends of John Perzel is NOT a Federal Political Action Committee and, as such, is prohibited from giving Jim Gerlach more than $2100.
Who is John Perzel you might ask? He happens to be one of the most powerful Republicans in Pennsylvania. The Philadelphia area lawmaker is the Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.
This is Part Three of a series detailing serious and careless errors in Congressman Jim Gerlach's FEC reports. Lois Murphy and her intrepid staff have discovered ten significant problems with the Congressman's filings. You can read the FEC Complaint here.
In this segment we'll look at Gerlach's failure to record small contributions and his failure to accurately report small contributions to his campaign.
Incidentally, Gerlach has responded publicly to the Complaint, citing failures by his staff and replacing his campaign Treasurer. I take this as an admission that these accusations are all factual. To date (note, this was December 1, 2005) I haven't seen him contest any of the allegations cited by Murphy.
First let's discuss how reporting of small contributions is done. Federal campaigns must report the total amount of all contributions made. Any contributor who donates $200 or more in any reporting period (every three months) must be identified in the FEC report (unless you're Jim Gerlach).
Small contributors are those giving less than $200 in a reporting period. It's essential for a campaign to record every transaction. Besides being required, it is also basic bookkeeping, accounting, and necessary to insure no single individual goes over the legally allowable maximum of $2100 per election cycle.
Lois Murphy and her staff discovered that Gerlach "failed to maintain an accurate account of small contributions and failed to accurately disclose the total amount of contributions received from donors."
She also found "Gerlach failed to disclose all or some contributions made by individuals in violation of FEC law."
Let's examine the first accusation. All Federal campaigns are required to record the names and addresses of every donor, along with the date of the donation. They are then required to report the total amount of such contributions each quarter. In the Third Quarterly Report for 2005 Gerlach actually said his campaign had a NEGATIVE total of small contributions. They reported a loss of $8,911.21 for that three month period.
Let's see if we can imagine a scenario where a sitting Congressman, in a three month period, actually had a negative cash flow of small contributions..... Did his campaign actually return $8,911.21 more of these donations than they received? If you believe that please step over here for the booth where I'll be selling rights to the Brooklyn Bridge.
In our second citation today we're looking at the segment where Gerlach also failed to report contributions. Gee, do you think there's a pattern of incompetence here?
Committees are required, under Federal law, to report all contributions received in any Quarter exceeding $200. The report requires the disclosure of the individual's name, address, their employer, the date of the contribution, their occupation, the election designation, and the election cycle. For a bit of explanation, let me define what an election cycle is.
An election cycle means the period of time prior to each election. The election in 2004 was an election cycle and the 2006 election is another election cycle. Within the 2006 election cycle a candidate can accept a maximum of $2100 for the primary election and another $2100 for the general election. If a candidate accepts all $4200 at once half of it must be set aside for the subsequent general election and not spent until after the primary.
A Political Action Committee has a maximum contribution of $5000 under these same rules. All PAC's donating to Federal candidates MUST be registered with the FEC in order to contribute to a Federal candidate. Gerlach accepted a $4000 contribution designated for the primary election from Friends of John Perzel. Friends of John Perzel is NOT a Federal Political Action Committee and, as such, is prohibited from giving Jim Gerlach more than $2100.
Who is John Perzel you might ask? He happens to be one of the most powerful Republicans in Pennsylvania. The Philadelphia area lawmaker is the Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.
posted by PA progressive @ Saturday, July 22, 2006
<< Home