December 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« Lights Out | Main | It Doesn't Look Good for Our Hero »

April 14, 2008

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I can't stand Hillary, but sadly, no. If the premise in update 2 was correct, then how could any U.S. citizen-rock star ever perform at a campaign fundraiser? If Sir Elton has a green card than even as a foreign national he's allowed to contribute to a campaign, and if he doesn't he can still volunteer. See here.

No. The link specifically says this:

By contrast, the decision in AO 1981-51 prohibited a foreign national artist from donating his services in connection with fundraising for a Senate campaign.

Is there even advance people in her campaign? Also, who set's the going rate for Sir Elton John's services? The last time he came to Buffalo, NY I think he made close to 50,000 beans before playing a note on stage. Also also, with regards to update 2: How does rendering services for a fee constitute an in-kind donation? If the caterer does a $5,000 lunch for a candidate have they broken the law?

Also also, with regards to update 2: How does rendering services for a fee constitute an in-kind donation? If the caterer does a $5,000 lunch for a candidate have they broken the law?

I think that what the update is trying to say is that it is illegal for two reasons: 1) it's a donation by a foreign national and 2) its value exceeds $2300. If the Clinton campaign pays him, they're good on both scores.

Hillary is disgusting, but I think Judicial Watch is wrong on this one. Elton John is a volunteer donating his personal services, uncompensated, and that doesn't count as an in-kind donation. If JW were right, then all political concerts would be illegal unless the performers were being paid out of campaign funds or were relative unknowns.

I'm not a lawyer, but I think they've got this one nailed. I cannot remember EVER hearing about a big star performing at a political fundraiser before. Not for a candidate. A cause maybe, but not an actual candidate. Rallies yes, inaugural balls yes, but not fundraisers.

This is an open and shut flouting of campaign election law.

If the funds raised are independent of the in-kind donation, then how is this different from will.i.am's Yes I Can video (aside from the foreign national part)? Does it matter if it's not an overt fund raising tool?

/anti-troll disclaimer: I'm gay for obama and think hillary can get bent. I'm just curious about these election laws.

Like many commenters I am not a lawyer for all the other non-lawyers comparing this to campaign rally performances by other rock stars, I think there is at least one significant difference: I don't believe that tickets were sold for those events, and in particular I don't think that those events were billed as concerts but rather as rallies that happened to include the performers.

Although, didn't Streisand do a concert for Clinton as well? Because the "foreign national" thing is a red herring, the real issue is whether performing at a concert whose proceeds go to the campaign is a (>$2300) in-kind donation.

It could be that a 70 year old pop star doesn't have any value at all.

The value of the service could probably be assessed as Union Scale which would get it under the limit. You cannot provide professional services gratis to a federal campaign - they are in kind contributions. Elton John is a professional and he brought to the campaign his profession.

I don't think this is right. I think Elton was actually volunteering for Hillary. I think he can do this even without a green card, since volunteer work does not count as a contribution.

It seems the FEC has already spoken on this:

Bob Biersack, F.E.C. spokesman confirmed that there was nothing unlawful about the Elton John performance:

“I did not intend to convey in my conversation with the Washington Times reporter that there is anything unlawful about Elton John performing in a concert to raise money for a US presidential candidate. The Advisory Opinion 2004-26 is clear in the circumstances of the request that foreign nationals may volunteer and may even solicit contributions from non-foreign nationals, provided they are not soliciting other foreign nationals.”

NYTimes

It seems the FEC has already spoken on this:

Bob Biersack, F.E.C. spokesman confirmed that there was nothing unlawful about the Elton John performance:

“I did not intend to convey in my conversation with the Washington Times reporter that there is anything unlawful about Elton John performing in a concert to raise money for a US presidential candidate. The Advisory Opinion 2004-26 is clear in the circumstances of the request that foreign nationals may volunteer and may even solicit contributions from non-foreign nationals, provided they are not soliciting other foreign nationals.”

NYTimes

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support This Blog


Philadelphia Bloggers