Abuse of Power

Richard Beliles, chairman of Common Cause Kentucky, a group that advocates for accountability and equity in government, has stood opposite McConnell on most issues for decades, specifically campaign finance. He told Salon that Forcht and McConnell likely have a broader long-term goal, and may be trying to wrap otherwise untenable liability protections in the bunting of the pandemic. "These liability protections might help someone like Forcht, but many more people who may be accidentally injured, they're sort of out of luck," Beliles said. "I'm hoping that maybe now, with Biden coming in, [McConnell] can do everything right for this issue that affects the needy in this country," Beliles said. "I know we really need it, the people of Kentucky need it." "I guess I sound like an optimist, in terms of cooperation between the Democrats and Republicans," Beliles added. "But if we're this close, I don't want to offend him."

CHOW: Catherine Turcer of Common Cause Ohio says the group wouldn't disclose where the money was coming from, and that makes it hard on voters. CATHERINE TURCER: If they can't understand how our legislators are making decisions or who is attempting to influence elections or to influence the way we feel about public policy, well, then we're left in the dark.

“It’s important for the sake of democracy for people who break campaign finance and other laws to be held accountable even if they’ve spent four years as president,” said Paul S. Ryan, a campaign finance litigator at the nonpartisan nonprofit Common Cause.

“What we’re seeing in a number of states are clear attempts to either roll back expansions of access to the ballot or add more suppressive measures,” said Sylvia Albert, who runs the voting and elections program at Common Cause.  “What’s happening here is legislatures using propaganda to make changes to election law. Changes to election law should be made very deliberately in concert with election officials in the states, with election experts, with nonpartisan advocacy groups, with security experts,” Albert said. “They are using the president’s rhetoric and all of the undermining of the election as an excuse, and I say excuse because there are no facts to back up what they are saying.”

November is officially in the rear-view mirror, but the election is still in the headlines, and we’re being forced to look back. Why? The will of the people of Pennsylvania is clear and the election outcome will not change. Pennsylvanians turned out in record numbers to vote in this election. Over 6.9 million — or 70.9% — of voting-age Pennsylvanians cast their ballot. Black and brown leaders, organizers, and voters made a herculean effort to ensure that every eligible voter could vote, and every vote was counted. To call the election results into question is nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt to delegitimize participation in democracy, especially by Black voters. Here in the commonwealth, we pick our leaders. Our leaders do not pick and choose which voices to listen to and which ones to silence. We have spoken. We’ve elected our next president.

In an interview with S. V. Date, of HuffPost, Paul S. Ryan, a campaign-finance lawyer at the watchdog group Common Cause, used more colloquial language. “It’ll be a slush fund,” he said. Whereas the rules governing campaign pacs are fairly strict, the rules for leadership pacs are scandalously lax. OpenSecrets notes that some politicians use such funds to make campaign donations to other candidates in their party. Trump could end up doing this, too, but he also has many other options, including directing some of the donations to himself and his children. “Trump could decide to pay himself $1 million a year out of this fund,” Ryan noted. “That’s legal. He could pay Don Jr. and Ivanka, if he wanted to.”