LAS VEGAS – Nevada Republican Party Executive Director Greg Bailor released the following statement on Ruben Kihuen and the DCCC’s flagrant abuse of campaign finance laws:
“Ruben Kihuen and the DCCC are blatantly violating campaign finance law by deliberately misreporting numerous ads as ‘hybrids’ in a flagrant attempt to blow past lawfully established limits on coordinated advertising.
“Given his previous record as a principal at a company that lobbies for payday lenders accused of preying on low-income Hispanic communities, as well as his ties to political ally and friend of Ricki Barlow who is currently facing FBI investigation for corruption, it should come as no surprise Kihuen is tied up in another shady deal. Kihuen’s campaign continues to struggle against Congressman Cresent Hardy, and this new revelation shows he is willing to resort to anything – even illegal campaign finance practices – to benefit his own political career.”
An independent campaign finance watchdog has filed an FEC complaint against Ruben Kihuen, the DCCC, and numerous other Democrats for breaking campaign finance law. “Some candidates have legally exceeded the party-coordination limits in recent elections by making carefully worded ‘hybrid’ ads, which justify the unlimited cost splitting by making generic references to the parties as well as mentioning local candidates. But the DCCC is sharing massive campaign costs on ads directly naming a presidential candidate as well as local House candidates, which have prompted a series of FEC complaints from the Foundation for Accountability and Civic Trust. ‘This is a clear violation,’ said FACT executive director Matt Whitaker, a former U.S. attorney in the George W. Bush administration.” (“Complaints allege House Democrats’ Trump ads break campaign finance law,” Politico, Scott Bland, October 25 2016)
- Ruben Kihuen and national Democrats are undermining campaign finance law by misreporting these in-kind contributions to the Clinton campaign as hybrid ads. “The generic reference to candidates … is crucial to the concept of hybrid advertisements: that portion of the advertisement is attributable to the party committee solely because the political party derives proportional benefit from the advertisement’s generic party references,” FACT’s complaint against Applegate reads. “Without generic party references, the political party committee derives no benefit from its portion of the advertisement, and the costs of the political party’s portion must be paid for as a coordinated party expenditure or classified as an in-kind contribution to the clearly identified candidate.”
Nevada Republican Party