| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Lurid Crime Tales- |
| U.S. attorney opens probe of CT Governor Malloy’s 2014 campaign fundraising |
| 2016-08-02 |
| A federal grand jury with the power to subpoena documents and compel testimony is trying to do what state elections regulators could not: Resolve whether the Connecticut Democratic Party and Gov. Dannel P. Malloy broke the law in soliciting contributions from state contractors for his re-election in 2014. Citing unnamed sources, The Hartford Courant first reported the existence of the criminal investigation Friday and the issuance of subpoenas. Thomas Carson, spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, declined to comment, but the state Democratic Party acknowledged the investigation and pledged cooperation. The Connecticut Democrats agreed in mid-June to pay a record $325,000 over 27 months to resolve a State Elections Enforcement Commission investigation of a complaint filed in 2014 by Romano's predecessor, Jerry Labriola. Connecticut bars state contractors from donating to state campaigns, while federal law dictates the rules for raising and spending money that is used for get-out-the-vote efforts in federal election years, when state elections are also held. Contractors can give to federal races and to the party's federal account. Essentially, candidates, campaigns and political parties operate under two sets of contradictory campaign financing rules: one provides public financing to candidates who agree to accept donations of no more than $100 and abide by spending limits that vary by office; the other allows state parties to accept maximum donations of $10,000 a year and spend unlimited amounts supporting their candidates. Malloy benefitted from both systems. The governor and party officials have declined to talk about how they targeted companies who do business with the state for campaign contributions. Labriola complained that Malloy and the Democratic Party were subverting the voluntary public financing program, which requires participants to abide by limits on spending and accept contributions of no more than $100. The Democrats claimed that not only did federal law permit the use of the federal account to pay for get-out-the-vote efforts that benefitted Malloy, but that the federal law required it. The Democrats were fighting an investigative subpoena issued by the commission for emails, bank records and other documents, arguing that federal campaign law pre-empts the investigation. At the time of the proposed settlement, a Superior Court judge was poised to rule on the commission's motion to compel the party to abide by the demand for documents. The dispute began over an obscure mailing late in the 2014 gubernatorial campaign, but it quickly escalated into a legal battle with potentially dire consequences for Malloy, the state party and the authority of the commission. The federal investigation is a major political complication for Malloy at time when he is in the spotlight as chairman of the Democratic Governors Association and a campaign surrogate for Hillary Clinton. |
| Posted by:Pappy |