Does the FEC require full disclosure? re: Tea Party $1m anon. donation

[Whoa_Nelly]

Per previous DU post by one_voice, regarding Tea Party receiving $1m anonymous donation at this DU link:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x9174891


I am wondering...Does the FEC require full disclosure?

Or does this not count at all since the TEA party is really not a registered political party...or are they?

How does this fly?

Thx in advance :hi:

[Whoa_Nelly]

1. anyone?

:o

[tammywammy]

2. Kick

I don't know the answer, but it's an interesting question.

[dflprincess]

3. On a hopeful note

http://www.startribune.com/politics/state/103349914.html?elr=KArks8c7PaP3iUoaEaD_ec7PaP3iUiacyKUUr

Judge won't block campaign finance law

Saying that voters have "an interest in knowing who is speaking about a candidate on the eve of an election," a federal judge on Monday refused to strike down a Minnesota campaign finance law requiring a corporation to disclose when it spends money to support or defeat a candidate.

U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank ruled that the plaintiffs -- Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life (MCCL), the Taxpayers League of Minnesota and Coastal Travel Enterprises -- are unlikely to prove that the law hampers their right to free speech.

Instead, Frank said, the law "serves an important government interest."

"Such transparency assures that the electorate will be able to make informed decisions and properly evaluate the speakers and their messages," he said. "Invalidating the election laws at issue here would likely result in corporations making independent expenditures without any reporting or disclosure on the eve of the upcoming general election on Nov. 2. This result so close to the election would clearly harm the state, Minnesota voters, and the general public interest."

[gmoney]

4. FEC? Didn't the Supreme Court do away with them?

Standing in the way of billionaires and multinational corporations from expressing their beliefs...

[Whoa_Nelly]

5. UPDATE! (or HOW the Tea Party will evade disclosure)

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2010/09/tea-party-group-gets-1-million-anonymous-donation/1

<snip>
Meckler said the grant will be distributed among the Tea Party Patriots' 2,800 local affiliates to help further voter education and turnout efforts. "None of this money is to be used for direct election activities," he said.

Translation: As long as the Tea Party Patriots do not mention candidates' names in their material or explicitly advocate for or against a specific candidates' election, they don't have to meet federal requirements to disclose their donors. This according to Paul Ryan, one of the experts at the Campaign Legal Center, a non-partisan watchdog group that monitors election law.

<snip>

"The Target corporation is Exhibit A," he said. The reference is to the furor set off when news surfaced this year of the mega-retailer's financial support for a Minnesota gubernatorial candidate who opposed gay marriage. Gay rights advocates boycotted the company, and Target apologized to employees.

At the news conference today, Meckler took a not-so-indirect swipe at a rival Tea Party organization, the Tea Party Express, which operates a full-fledged political action committee that has reported more than $5 million in donations to the Federal Election Commission.