The Federal Election Commission stalemated Thursday on writing new campaign finance rules to limit wealthy donors’ spending in federal elections, virtually ensuring next year’s elections will be fought under the current rules that the Supreme Court has written in several major decisions this decade.
Commissioners deadlocked 3-3 on a proposal from Democratic-backed members to write new rules in the wake of the McCutcheon v. FEC decision last year that struck down aggregate campaign finance limits, freeing rich Americans to contribute money to as many candidates and political parties as they want.
Democrats also signaled they’d been chastened by another effort last year to impose campaign finance rules on Internet videos, after 5,000 comments poured in to commissioners telling them to lay off Internet speech as they considered post-McCutcheon rules.
In the wake of the criticism, Democrats fervently denied they had far-reaching plans to clamp down on online politicking.
“For the public record, and for the press that’s here, I never proposed any regulation of the Internet,” Commissioner Ann M. Ravel said Thursday.
But Commissioner Lee E. Goodman, a Republican, said the public could have been confused when Democrats opposed his effort to declare online political blogging and videos free of many reporting requirements that go along with more traditional television advertising. The Democratic-backed members had wanted to probe a nonprofit that posted political videos on YouTube, but lost that bid on another 3-3 tie vote.
SEE ALSO: Texas demands Obama prove he’s halted deportation amnesty
Mr. Goodman said Democrats might benefit from finding a public way to prove they aren’t targeting the Internet.
“To some extent, the public may want clarification by the commission of the breadth of their freedom on the Internet,” Mr. Goodman said Thursday.
Ms. Ravel, who was poised to become commission chair at the time, had said she would lead a push this year to try to come up with new rules for political speech on the Internet, saying a “re-examination” was overdue.
Web regulations would mark a major reversal for the commission, which for nearly a decade has protected the ability of individuals and interest groups to take to engage in a robust political conversation on the Internet without having to worry about registering with the government or keeping and reporting records of their expenses.
Political committees and individuals or groups who pay to have their ads run online are still subject to disclosure requirements.
“There is an existing FEC regulation and the commission will abide by that regulation,” Ms. Ravel told The Washington Times in a statement through her office Thursday.
SEE ALSO: Senate averts trade filibuster, delivers big win to Obama in fast-track fight
From the dais, Commissioner Ellen Weintraub, a Democrat, suggested Mr. Goodman had a habit of “drumming up” controversy on the subject.
The spat underscored a pattern of partisanship that’s dominated the FEC of late — a trend that continued Thursday, as the panel split found itself deadlocked once again.
Democrats had sought to shore up the disclosure of political spending through new rules, saying it would work hand in hand with the McCutcheon opinion’s faith in transparency as an alternative to flat bans how much a person can give.
Vice Chairman Matthew S. Petersen, a Republican, said the commission should let Congress craft a response to the Supreme Court, if it wants to.
“That is where the laws are made,” he said. “The laws are not made here at the agency.”
• Tom Howell Jr. can be reached at thowell@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.