Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The money is supposed to publicly fund presidential campaigns. But it doesn't.</li><li>Republicans and Democrats in <keyword id="11893699" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="congress" source="Orion">Congress</keyword> can't agree on what to do with the ever-growing pot.</li><li>Charities told Insider the money could do great good for suffering Americans.</li></ul>Holed away in a government account is a massive cash stash most anyone — from depleted federal programs to coronavirus-throttled charitable causes — would love to tap.But it sits idle and untouched.The intended beneficiaries of the taxpayer-fueled <keyword id="12671702" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="presidential-election-campaign-fund" source="Orion">Presidential Election Campaign Fund</keyword> — presidential candidates — don't want it, as they're soured by its <a href="https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understanding-ways-support-federal-candidates/presidential-elections/public-funding-presidential-elections/">restrictions</a> on their election fundraising and spending.Other prospective recipients, meanwhile, can't have it.Congress is what's preventing this. Conservatives would prefer to disband the fund and repurpose its money. Many Democrats want the money to seed a reimagined public campaign-finance program contained within a broader <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-republicans-block-passage-of-democrats-flagship-voting-rights-bill-2021-6">"democracy-reform" agenda</a> that's hamstrung on Capitol Hill. Neither side will budge.Meanwhile, the Presidential Election Campaign Fund's pot had topped more than $422.6 million as of May 31 — a record amount during the fund's nearly 50-year history, according to US Treasury records reviewed by Insider. <div type="image" title="US Treasury report on the Presidential Election Campaign Fund" height="807" width="1224" msid="92394188" hostid="261"></div>The fund grew by more than $1.9 million from May 1 to May 31 alone, according to US Treasury records.If current trends continue, the fund will continue to grow each month by six- or seven-figures thanks to the financial heft generated by American taxpayers who <a href="https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/checkoff_brochure.pdf">check that little box</a> on their annual tax return that directs $3 to the fund.<h2>'Help people and communities recover'</h2>In a congressional session when lawmakers are measuring <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/stimulus-package-pandemic-surpass-great-recession-fiscal-plans-recovery-2021-3">economic relief</a> and <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-throws-support-behind-1-trillion-infrastructure-deal-with-gop-2021-6">infrastructure</a> bills in the trillions of dollars, a few hundred million deserted federal greenbacks may seem comparatively paltry.But some charitable organizations that serve people often possess next to nothing. Several nonprofit leaders told Insider that Congress could use the Presidential Election Campaign Fund money to immediately ease suffering."The best possible use of $400 million would be to provide funds for charities to help people and communities recover," Steve Taylor, <a href="https://www.unitedway.org/about">United Way Worldwide</a>'s senior vice president and counsel for public policy, said, citing a looming eviction crisis, a burdened childcare system, education challenges, and mental-health needs among urgent pandemic-era problems. "Charities are leading the way in addressing these problems, and $400 million in new funding would be a game changer."While the federal government has directed significant funding toward its COVID-19 response, the pandemic is far from over, and people around the world will endure its aftereffects for a long while, said Judy Monroe, the president and CEO of the <a href="https://www.cdcfoundation.org/our-story">CDC Foundation</a>, an independent nonprofit that supports the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's health-protection work."Additional federal funds that are not actively being utilized could, as deemed appropriate by Congress, be repurposed and brought to bear to address critical needs from COVID-19 to health inequities to strengthening the nation's public-health system to be prepared for the next, inevitable outbreak," Monroe told Insider.Erika Cotton Boyce, a <a href="https://www.habitat.org/about?mrkgadid=3311692497&amp;mrkgcl=1005&amp;mrkgen=gtext&amp;mrkgbflag=1&amp;mrkgcat=exact&amp;acctid=21700000001719422&amp;device=c&amp;network=g&amp;matchtype=e&amp;locationid=%7Bloc_phyiscal_ms%7D&amp;creative=254592403910&amp;targetid=kwd-27088694595&amp;campaignid=138111921&amp;adgroupid=8353761441&amp;gclid=Cj0KCQjwraqHBhDsARIsAKuGZeEVvwa-KauRrXkD3ZQZPiei5J3PQSfaw5hFY4oCYkfXldC3gMFuQ0saAnLMEALw_wcB&amp;gclsrc=aw.ds">Habitat for Humanity</a> spokesperson, declined to speak specifically about the Presidential Election Campaign Fund but broadly said Congress should "find resources to fund critical programs that will address housing supply and housing affordability, especially homeownership programs for low-income families."Congress has various mechanisms for directing public funding to nonprofit entities. A bill <a href="https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s740/BILLS-117s740is.pdf">introduced</a> by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, hopes to further help charitable nonprofits "provide services to meet the increasing demand in community needs caused by the coronavirus pandemic, preserve and create jobs in the nonprofit sector, reduce unemployment, and promote economic recovery."<div type="image" title="Sen. Joni Ernst" height="1333" width="2000" msid="92394191" hostid="261"></div><h2>Debt reduction, pediatric care, Alzheimer's research</h2>Some lawmakers and special-interest advocates have other designs on the more than $422 million.During the 2019-20 congressional session, two Republican lawmakers sponsored similar bills that attempted to kill the Presidential Election Campaign Fund.Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma <a href="https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr290/BILLS-116hr290ih.pdf">sought to transfer</a> the campaign fund's cash balance to a pediatric-research initiative administered by the National Institutes of Health.Sen. <keyword id="12071057" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="joni-ernst" source="Orion">Joni Ernst</keyword> of Iowa, meanwhile, <a href="https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s3225/BILLS-116s3225is.pdf">wanted the money</a> sent to the US Treasury's general fund and used to help reduce the federal budget deficit.Neither bill received a hearing, let alone a vote.In September, Ernst <a href="https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2799/BILLS-117s2799is.pdf">tried again</a> with a similar bill that so far has garnered little support.That's a shame, said Joshua Sewell, a senior policy analyst at the nonpartisan <a href="https://www.taxpayer.net/about/">Taxpayers for Common Sense</a> who deemed the campaign fund "a vestige of a bygone era." He recommended its money be used to help pay down the country's national debt, which stood at <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/22053295-monthly-statement-public-debt-april-2022">more than $30.3 trillion</a> as of April 30, according to the Treasury Department. Bradley Smith, a former <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> chairman who now leads the nonprofit <a href="https://www.ifs.org/about-us/">Institute for Free Speech</a>, said Congress should repeal the law establishing the fund and direct its money to the Treasury's general fund. In April, the nonprofit Bipartisan Policy Center <a href="https://bipartisanpolicy.org/report/reimagining-federal-election-funding/">released a report</a> that recommended reallocating the fund's money to election administration. Doing so, it said, would provide "consistent, additional federal resources to meet a clear and growing need ... this incentivizes state and local governments to invest in their election infrastructure as well." Cole plans to reintroduce a new bill targeting the presidential fund, he told Insider. And he's open to broadening where the $420.7 million might go."If the money were to be redirected somewhere other than pediatric-disease research, Alzheimer's research would certainly be a worthy cause," Cole said.<h2>Resist and reform</h2>Congressional Democrats in 2021 made voting, ethics, and campaign-finance reform a chief priority, which is enshrined in bills known as <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text">HR 1</a> and <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22s.+1%22%5D%7D&amp;r=1&amp;s=1">S 1</a> — colloquially, the "For the People Act of 2021."A historically robust public financing system for federal elections is part of the For the People Act.But Senate Republicans filibustered the For the People Act, effectively killing it. Democrats then floated a similar, but slimmed-down bill called the "<a href="https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2747/BILLS-117s2747pcs.pdf">Freedom to Vote Act</a>," which does not include strong public financing language.Supporters of publicly funded campaigns say this is no time to give up — or to give away more than $422 million that's already earmarked and available for the public financing of elections.The For the People Act "represents the boldest democracy reform since Watergate, and any funds currently available for the old system should be used for the new system of federal citizen-funded elections, which must pass so we can get big money out of <keyword id="11893346" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="politics" source="Orion">politics</keyword>," Beth Rotman, the director of money in politics and ethics for <a href="https://www.commoncause.org/about-us/">Common Cause</a>, said prior to the bill's stall-out."Getting rid of the money at this point would send the wrong signal," said <keyword id="12671704" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="meredith-mcgehee" source="Orion">Meredith McGehee</keyword>, the former executive director of the nonprofit group <keyword id="12671703" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="issue-one" source="Orion">Issue One</keyword>, a <a href="https://www.issueone.org/about/">self-described</a> "crosspartisan movement for political reform."The pro-Democrat organization <a href="https://endcitizensunited.org/about-us/">End Citizens United</a>, which takes its name from the Supreme Court's 2010 <a href="https://publicintegrity.org/politics/the-citizens-united-decision-and-why-it-matters/">decision</a> that unleashed gushers of new political money into elections, also backed keeping the cash in place."The existing presidential system was designed following Watergate for anti-corruption purposes," the group's spokesperson Bawadden Sayed said, "and we would be supportive of potentially using it for future anti-corruption purposes."<div type="image" title="Barack Obama" height="1334" width="2000" msid="92394194" hostid="261"></div><h2>Thanks, Obama?</h2>Public presidential-campaign funding wasn't always so derelict.From the late 1970s to the late 1990s, the Presidential Election Campaign Fund enjoyed a heyday, distributing eight or nine figures of public money to candidates each election cycle.Supporters lauded the program as an elixir to big-money politics and a defense against corruption. Candidates from both parties routinely opted to use it. Doing so allowed them to spend less time fundraising and more time campaigning.And since both sides participated, neither side engaged in the kind of political money arms races emblematic of contemporary presidential elections.But the détente wouldn't last. Citing financial advantages, George W. Bush <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/16/us/bush-forgoes-federal-funds-and-has-no-spending-limit.html">rejected</a> public matching funds during the 2000 Republican presidential primary. Both Bush and eventual Democratic nominee John Kerry declined public funding in their 2004 presidential primaries. Come 2008, Democrat <keyword id="11922325" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="barack-obama" source="Orion">Barack Obama</keyword> rendered the Presidential Election Campaign Fund functionally obsolete by becoming the first major-party presidential candidate in post-Watergate politics to reject public funding during a general presidential election. Obama even <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics/obama-rejects-public-financing-against-mccain-idUSN1828132020080619">broke a campaign promise</a> to do so — he previously said he'd use public funding. The future president knew he could privately raise and spend hundreds of millions of dollars more than the public program would afford him. Republican presidential nominee John McCain accepted public money — and lost.No Democratic or Republican presidential nominee has since used public funding. Only a smattering of minor-party and longshot Democratic-primary candidates have patronized the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, who drew about $3 million combined since the 2012 race.The fund didn't distribute a single dollar to any presidential candidate during the 2020 presidential election.It last provided funding to presidential nominating conventions in 2012, as Congress two years later passed, and Obama signed, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2014/03/26/294383506/say-goodbye-to-the-taxpayer-funded-political-convention">a law that axed</a> public funding of conventions.Congress <a href="https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/PECF_monthly_report_2019.pdf">siphoned</a> tens of millions of dollars from the presidential fund that otherwise would have gone to party conventions to a pediatric-research fund — the same one that Cole, the Oklahoma congressman, wants to fill with the account's full balance.Until that or any other repurposing decision comes down, the <keyword id="12021087" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="fec" source="Orion">FEC</keyword> continues to spend taxpayer resources keeping the Presidential Election Campaign Fund alive.The agency's audit division has administrative, oversight, and enforcement responsibilities over the program, Judith Ingram, an FEC spokesperson, said. The independent, bipartisan FEC, which regulates and enforces the nation's campaign-finance laws, employs about 300 people. Its <a href="https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/FEC_FY22_CBJ_May_28_2021.pdf">projected 2022 budget</a> is about $76.5 million, meaning the balance of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund could theoretically fund the agency for a full five years.This article was originally published on July 13, 2021, and has since been updated to include new financial data and legislative developments.

How more than $422 million in taxpayer money got locked away in a forgotten government fund &mdash; and lawmakers won't spend it or return it

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The money is supposed to publicly fund presidential campaigns. But it doesn't.</li><li>Republicans and Democrats in <keyword id="11893699" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="congress" source="Orion">Congress</keyword> can't agree on what to do with the ever-growing pot.</li><li>Charities told Insider the money could do great good for suffering Americans.</li></ul>Holed away in a government account is a massive cash stash most anyone — from depleted federal programs to American taxpayers — would love to tap.But it sits idle and untouched.The intended beneficiaries of the taxpayer-fueled <keyword id="12671702" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="presidential-election-campaign-fund" source="Orion">Presidential Election Campaign Fund</keyword> — presidential candidates — don't want it, as they're soured by its <a href="https://www.fec.gov/introduction-campaign-finance/understanding-ways-support-federal-candidates/presidential-elections/public-funding-presidential-elections/">restrictions</a> on their election fundraising and spending.Other prospective recipients, meanwhile, can't have it.Congress is what's preventing this. Conservatives would prefer to disband the fund and repurpose its money. Many Democrats want the money to seed a reimagined public campaign-finance program contained within a broader, but ill-fated <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/senate-republicans-block-passage-of-democrats-flagship-voting-rights-bill-2021-6">"democracy-reform" agenda</a> on Capitol Hill. Neither side will budge.Meanwhile, the Presidential Election Campaign Fund's pot has reached almost $427.4 million — a record amount during the fund's nearly 50-year history, according to US Treasury records reviewed by Insider. <div type="image" title="Presidential Election Campaign Fund accounting" height="1256" width="1800" msid="96382035" hostid="261" sizebytes="83364"></div>The fund grew by about $550,000 from November 1 to November 30, according to US Treasury records.If current trends continue, the fund will continue to grow each month by six- or seven-figures thanks to the financial heft generated by American taxpayers who <a href="https://transition.fec.gov/pages/brochures/checkoff_brochure.pdf">check that little box</a> on their annual tax return that directs $3 to the fund.<h2>'Help people and communities recover'</h2>In a congressional session when lawmakers are measuring <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/stimulus-package-pandemic-surpass-great-recession-fiscal-plans-recovery-2021-3">economic relief,</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-throws-support-behind-1-trillion-infrastructure-deal-with-gop-2021-6">infrastructure</a>, and "<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/inflation-reduction-act-how-it-reduces-price-growth-deficit-pressures-2022-8">inflation reduction</a>" bills in the billions or trillions of dollars, a few hundred million deserted federal greenbacks may seem comparatively paltry.But some charitable organizations that serve people often possess next to nothing. Several nonprofit leaders told Insider that Congress could use the Presidential Election Campaign Fund money to immediately ease suffering, particularly in light of the COVID-19 pandemic."The best possible use of $400 million would be to provide funds for charities to help people and communities recover," Steve Taylor, <a href="https://www.unitedway.org/about">United Way Worldwide</a>'s senior vice president and counsel for public policy, said, citing a looming eviction crisis, a burdened childcare system, education challenges, and mental-health needs among urgent pandemic-era problems. "Charities are leading the way in addressing these problems, and $400 million in new funding would be a game changer."While the federal government has directed significant funding toward its COVID-19 response, the pandemic is far from over, and people around the world will endure its aftereffects for a long while, said Judy Monroe, the president and CEO of the <a href="https://www.cdcfoundation.org/our-story">CDC Foundation</a>, an independent nonprofit that supports the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's health-protection work."Additional federal funds that are not actively being utilized could, as deemed appropriate by Congress, be repurposed and brought to bear to address critical needs from COVID-19 to health inequities to strengthening the nation's public-health system to be prepared for the next, inevitable outbreak," Monroe told Insider.Erika Cotton Boyce, a <a href="https://www.habitat.org/about?mrkgadid=3311692497&amp;mrkgcl=1005&amp;mrkgen=gtext&amp;mrkgbflag=1&amp;mrkgcat=exact&amp;acctid=21700000001719422&amp;device=c&amp;network=g&amp;matchtype=e&amp;locationid=%7Bloc_phyiscal_ms%7D&amp;creative=254592403910&amp;targetid=kwd-27088694595&amp;campaignid=138111921&amp;adgroupid=8353761441&amp;gclid=Cj0KCQjwraqHBhDsARIsAKuGZeEVvwa-KauRrXkD3ZQZPiei5J3PQSfaw5hFY4oCYkfXldC3gMFuQ0saAnLMEALw_wcB&amp;gclsrc=aw.ds">Habitat for Humanity</a> spokesperson, declined to speak specifically about the Presidential Election Campaign Fund but broadly said Congress should "find resources to fund critical programs that will address housing supply and housing affordability, especially homeownership programs for low-income families."Congress has various mechanisms for directing public funding to nonprofit entities. A bill <a href="https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s740/BILLS-117s740is.pdf">introduced</a> by Sen. Amy Klobuchar, a Minnesota Democrat, hopes to further help charitable nonprofits "provide services to meet the increasing demand in community needs caused by the coronavirus pandemic, preserve and create jobs in the nonprofit sector, reduce unemployment, and promote economic recovery."<div type="image" title="Sen. Joni Ernst" height="1333" width="2000" msid="88099014" hostid="261"></div><h2>Debt reduction, pediatric care, Alzheimer's research</h2>Some lawmakers and special-interest advocates have other designs on the nearly $427.4 million.During the 2019-20 congressional session, two Republican lawmakers sponsored similar bills that attempted to kill the Presidential Election Campaign Fund.Rep. Tom Cole of Oklahoma <a href="https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/hr290/BILLS-116hr290ih.pdf">sought to transfer</a> the campaign fund's cash balance to a pediatric-research initiative administered by the National Institutes of Health.Sen. <keyword id="12071057" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="joni-ernst" source="Orion">Joni Ernst</keyword> of Iowa, meanwhile, <a href="https://www.congress.gov/116/bills/s3225/BILLS-116s3225is.pdf">wanted the money</a> sent to the US Treasury's general fund and used to help reduce the federal budget deficit.Neither bill received a hearing, let alone a vote.More recently, Ernst <a href="https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2799/BILLS-117s2799is.pdf">tried again</a> with a similar bill that so far has garnered little support.That's a shame, said Joshua Sewell, a senior policy analyst at the nonpartisan <a href="https://www.taxpayer.net/about/">Taxpayers for Common Sense</a> who deemed the campaign fund "a vestige of a bygone era." He recommended its money be used to help pay down the country's national debt, which stood at <a href="https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23322360-statement-of-public-debt-october-2022">nearly $31.3 trillion</a> as of October 31, according to the Treasury Department. Bradley Smith, a former <keyword id="11964531" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="federal-election-commission" source="Orion">Federal Election Commission</keyword> chairman who now leads the nonprofit <a href="https://www.ifs.org/about-us/">Institute for Free Speech</a>, said Congress should repeal the law establishing the fund and direct its money to the Treasury's general fund. In April, the nonprofit Bipartisan Policy Center <a href="https://bipartisanpolicy.org/report/reimagining-federal-election-funding/">released a report</a> that recommended reallocating the fund's money to election administration. Doing so, it said, would provide "consistent, additional federal resources to meet a clear and growing need ... this incentivizes state and local governments to invest in their election infrastructure as well." Cole plans to reintroduce a new bill targeting the presidential fund, he told Insider. And he's open to broadening where the nearly $427.4 million might go."If the money were to be redirected somewhere other than pediatric-disease research, Alzheimer's research would certainly be a worthy cause," Cole said.<h2>Resist and reform</h2>Congressional Democrats in 2021 made voting, ethics, and campaign-finance reform a chief priority, which is enshrined in bills known as <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/1/text">HR 1</a> and <a href="https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/senate-bill/1/text?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22s.+1%22%5D%7D&amp;r=1&amp;s=1">S 1</a> — colloquially, the "For the People Act of 2021."A historically robust public financing system for federal elections is part of the For the People Act.But Senate Republicans filibustered the For the People Act, effectively killing it. Democrats then floated a similar, but slimmed-down bill called the "<a href="https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/s2747/BILLS-117s2747pcs.pdf">Freedom to Vote Act</a>," which does not include strong public financing language.Supporters of publicly funded campaigns say this is no time to give up — or to give away nearly $427.4 million that's already earmarked and available for the public financing of elections.The For the People Act "represents the boldest democracy reform since Watergate, and any funds currently available for the old system should be used for the new system of federal citizen-funded elections, which must pass so we can get big money out of <keyword id="11893346" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="politics" source="Orion">politics</keyword>," Beth Rotman, the director of money in politics and ethics for <a href="https://www.commoncause.org/about-us/">Common Cause</a>, said prior to the bill's stall-out."Getting rid of the money at this point would send the wrong signal," said <keyword id="12671704" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="meredith-mcgehee" source="Orion">Meredith McGehee</keyword>, the former executive director of the nonprofit group <keyword id="12671703" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="issue-one" source="Orion">Issue One</keyword>, a <a href="https://www.issueone.org/about/">self-described</a> "crosspartisan movement for political reform."The pro-Democrat organization <a href="https://endcitizensunited.org/about-us/">End Citizens United</a>, which takes its name from the Supreme Court's 2010 <a href="https://publicintegrity.org/politics/the-citizens-united-decision-and-why-it-matters/">decision</a> that unleashed gushers of new political money into elections, also backed keeping the cash in place."The existing presidential system was designed following Watergate for anti-corruption purposes," the group's spokesperson Bawadden Sayed said, "and we would be supportive of potentially using it for future anti-corruption purposes."<div type="image" title="Barack Obama" height="1334" width="2000" msid="88099015" hostid="261"></div><h2>Thanks, Obama?</h2>Public presidential-campaign funding wasn't always so derelict.From the late 1970s to the late 1990s, the Presidential Election Campaign Fund enjoyed a heyday, distributing eight or nine figures of public money to candidates each election cycle.Supporters lauded the program as an elixir to big-money politics and a defense against corruption. Candidates from both parties routinely opted to use it. Doing so allowed them to spend less time fundraising and more time campaigning.And since both sides participated, neither side engaged in the kind of political money arms races emblematic of contemporary presidential elections.But the détente wouldn't last. Citing financial advantages, George W. Bush <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/1999/07/16/us/bush-forgoes-federal-funds-and-has-no-spending-limit.html">rejected</a> public matching funds during the 2000 Republican presidential primary. Both Bush and eventual Democratic nominee John Kerry declined public funding in their 2004 presidential primaries. Come 2008, Democrat <keyword id="11922325" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="barack-obama" source="Orion">Barack Obama</keyword> rendered the Presidential Election Campaign Fund functionally obsolete by becoming the first major-party presidential candidate in post-Watergate politics to reject public funding during a general presidential election. Obama even <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-politics/obama-rejects-public-financing-against-mccain-idUSN1828132020080619">broke a campaign promise</a> to do so — he previously said he'd use public funding. The future president knew he could privately raise and spend hundreds of millions of dollars more than the public program would afford him. Republican presidential nominee John McCain accepted public money — and lost.No Democratic or Republican presidential nominee has since used public funding. Only a smattering of minor-party and longshot Democratic-primary candidates have patronized the Presidential Election Campaign Fund, who drew about $3 million combined since the 2012 race.The fund didn't distribute a single dollar to any presidential candidate during the 2020 presidential election.It last provided funding to presidential nominating conventions in 2012, as Congress two years later passed, and Obama signed, <a href="https://www.npr.org/2014/03/26/294383506/say-goodbye-to-the-taxpayer-funded-political-convention">a law that axed</a> public funding of conventions.Congress <a href="https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/PECF_monthly_report_2019.pdf">siphoned</a> tens of millions of dollars from the presidential fund that otherwise would have gone to party conventions to a pediatric-research fund — the same one that Cole, the Oklahoma congressman, wants to fill with the account's full balance.Until that or any other repurposing decision comes down, the <keyword id="12021087" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="fec" source="Orion">FEC</keyword> continues to spend taxpayer resources keeping the Presidential Election Campaign Fund alive.The agency's audit division has administrative, oversight, and enforcement responsibilities over the program, Judith Ingram, an FEC spokesperson, said. The independent, bipartisan FEC, which regulates and enforces the nation's campaign-finance laws, employs about 300 people. Its <a href="https://www.fec.gov/resources/cms-content/documents/FEC_FY22_CBJ_May_28_2021.pdf">projected 2022 budget</a> is about $76.5 million, meaning the balance of the Presidential Election Campaign Fund could theoretically fund the agency for a full five years.This article was originally published on July 13, 2021, and has since been updated to include new financial data and legislative developments.

How more than $427 million in taxpayer money is locked away in a forgotten government fund &mdash; and lawmakers won't spend it or return it

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Democrats lodged an ethics complaint against Josh Hawley and Ted Cruz nearly two years ago.</li><li>They argued that the two Republicans had engaged in "improper conduct" on January 6.</li></ul>In January 2021, a group of Democratic senators filed an ethics <a href="https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/1.21.21%20Ethics%20Complaint%20Against%20Cruz%20and%20Hawley%20Final.pdf">complaint</a> against Republican Sens. Josh Hawley of Missouri and Ted Cruz of Texas in relation to their conduct on the day the Capitol was assaulted by a mob of former President Donald Trump's supporters.The group asked the Senate Ethics Committee to determine whether the two Republicans, who each led objections to presidential election results in key swing states in 2020, had failed to uphold "loyalty to the highest moral principles and to country" or engaged in "improper conduct reflecting on the Senate."Since then, no one's heard much about it."I have no reason to believe anything about it, other than that it has not been concluded," Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island, who <a href="https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/1.21.21%20Ethics%20Complaint%20Against%20Cruz%20and%20Hawley%20Final.pdf">led the complaint</a> alongside six other Democratic senators, told Insider at the Capitol in December. He said that the investigation "seems to be ongoing," adding that the Senate Ethics Committee — made up of three senators from each party — makes just two public disclosures: when the panel closes an investigation, or when it makes a determination. The <a href="https://www.whitehouse.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/1.21.21%20Ethics%20Complaint%20Against%20Cruz%20and%20Hawley%20Final.pdf">complaint</a> argued that Cruz and Hawley's decision to proceed with objections to state-certified electors after the riot, while lawful, had "lent legitimacy to the mob's cause and made future violence more likely." They also asked the committee to investigate whether the senators or their staff had coordinated with rally organizers or those who stormed the Capitol."Until then, a cloud of uncertainty will hang over them and over this body," reads the complaint, which asked the committee for "recommendations for strong disciplinary action, including up to expulsion or censure, if warranted by the facts uncovered."But if you buy the senators' argument, that "cloud of uncertainty" remains two years later — and it doesn't appear likely to lift anytime soon. <div type="image" title="Democratic Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island led the complaint against Cruz and Hawley." height="1499" width="1999" msid="96795612" hostid="261" sizebytes="78266"></div>Meredith McGehee, an ethics expert who's long advocated for reforms to the committee at the watchdog groups <a href="https://issueone.org/articles/the-ethics-blind-spot-how-the-house-and-senate-ethics-committees-fail-to-foster-a-culture-of-high-ethical-standards-in-congress/">Issue One</a> and the <a href="https://campaignlegal.org/press-releases/us-senate-watchdogs-call-senate-ethics-committee-open-ethics-process-and-create">Campaign Legal Center</a>, says the public should keep their expectations low, arguing that the panel is "essentially where ethics complaints go to die.""I'm not saying there aren't behind-the-scenes activities," McGehee told Insider. "It's just nobody knows what that activity behind the scenes is."That seems to include the subjects of the complaint themselves. Hawley told Insider in December that he hadn't heard anything from the committee about the complaint — or about a <a href="https://www.hawley.senate.gov/hawley-calls-investigation-democrat-abuse-senate-ethics-process">counter-complaint he filed with the committee</a> accusing the Democratic senators of a "partisan abuse of the Senate ethics process.""Your guess is as good as mine," said Hawley.Cruz's office did not respond to Insider's request for comment.<h2>A 'black hole' where 'ethics complaints go to die'</h2>The bipartisan committee — led by Democratic Chair Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware and Republican Vice-Chair Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma — is subject to rules that do not allow members to disclose the status of investigations, or even speak about the committee's business generally.In fact, Coons could not even answer a general question about whether an investigation initiated during one Congress can carry over to the next (it can)."I cannot say a word, no matter how much I might want to," Coons told Insider in December. "I'm sorry, it's literally the rules of the committee."<div type="image" title="Democratic Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware and Republican Sen. James Lankford of Oklahoma, the chairman and vice-chairman of the Senate Ethics Committee." height="1000" width="2000" msid="96795614" hostid="261" sizebytes="93352"></div>According to McGehee, that's led to the committee becoming something of a "black hole.""They just basically take no meaningful public action," she said, likening the panel to the bastion of Senate clubbiness. Often, she said, the committee simply waits for someone to resign, or for some other entity to take action — such as the Department of Justice or local prosecutors — when possible. ""There's very little desire to air any dirty laundry in public."Other members of the committee include Democrats Sens. Brian Schatz of Hawaii and Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire and Republican Sens. Jim Risch of Idaho and Deb Fischer of Nebraska.McGehee speculated the complaint against Hawley and Cruz was probably too politically controversial for the committee to make any meaningful progress on, particularly given the fact that Lankford had <a href="https://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article248530080.html">originally planned to object to Electoral College results himself</a>. "Lord knows what his particular take is on this," she said.Little has emerged in the last two years to suggest that Cruz and Hawley were intimately involved in the assault on the Capitol. The <a href="https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-J6-REPORT/pdf/GPO-J6-REPORT.pdf">January 6 committee's final report</a> did not reveal any connection between the senators and rally organizers, and made little mention of the senators beyond their public actions — aside from an email from the White House about "2020 fraud" and calls from Rudy Giuliani attempting to persuade the senators to further delay the session.When asked if he was broadly confident in the manner that the Senate adjudicates ethics issues, Democratic Sen. Tim Kaine of Virginia, one of the senators who signed the complaint, stressed that he was confident in the members of the committee."I know the members of the committee, and they take it seriously," said Kaine. "I just don't know what, if anything, has been done."And McGehee offered that the committee is staffed by "very nice, competent people," even as its performance lays bare the perils of self-policing.A <a href="https://issueone.org/articles/the-ethics-blind-spot-how-the-house-and-senate-ethics-committees-fail-to-foster-a-culture-of-high-ethical-standards-in-congress/">2018 Issue One report </a>that McGehee co-authored makes the problem even more plain: "Keep in mind a Committee member may be investigating a colleague, and the next day that same member may be asking that colleague for support on a bill or vote," reads the report.The report points to the Office of Congressional Ethics — an independent body made up of experts that investigates ethics complaints against House members before making referrals to the House Committee on Ethics — as a useful model for the Senate. At the very least, McGehee <a href="https://campaignlegal.org/sites/default/files/Boxer_Isakson_Ethics_Committee_Letter_6-16-14.pdf">wrote in a separate 2014 letter</a>, the committee could be more transparent about its activities.Ultimately, McGehee speculated that the committee — seeking to avoid the "kerfuffle" that could come with either pursuing or closing the investigation — would quietly close the investigation sometime in the next two years."They'll probably issue some very lowkey letter, is my guess," she said.

It's still not clear what the Senate Ethics Committee is doing with a 2-year-old January 6 probe into Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley

<ul class="summary-list"><li>The House Ethics Committee could investigate George Santos over his alleged malfeasance.</li><li>But experts say the slow-moving panel likely won't drop the hammer on the scandal-plagued lawmaker.</li></ul>House Speaker Kevin McCarthy, facing ongoing questions about Rep. George Santos, has seemingly identified the House Committee on Ethics as the arbiter of the <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/george-santos-employment-college-pulse-shooting-residence-history-2022-12">scandal-plagued</a> New York Republican's fate."If ethics finds something, we'll take action," the speaker <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/07/politics/house-ethics-committee-probe-george-santos/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">told CNN on Tuesday</a>, referring to the panel chaired by Republican Rep. Michael Guest of Mississippi. "Right now, we're not allowing him to be on committees from the standpoint of the questions that have arisen."Earlier this week, McCarthy appeared to confirm that the committee was already investigating Santos, only for <a href="https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-rep-santos-facing-house-ethics-probe-mccarthy-2023-02-07/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an aide to later walk back</a> the Speaker's remarks; the committee has yet to fully organize itself.But ethics experts warn that the evenly-divided committee — composed of five Republicans and five Democrats — is unlikely to move swiftly or even take significant action on Santos. "This is like having your brother-in-law be the judge," said Daniel Schuman, policy director at Demand Progress and a government transparency and ethics advocate.Experts warn that the committee, which is tasked with regulating the ethical conduct of House members and investigating instances of wrongdoing, is severely hobbled by the mere fact that it operates within the context of a highly political body. Decisions are often made at the behest of party leadership, and lawmakers are hesitant to move against colleagues whose vote they may need down the line.That's where the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) — a separate investigative entity run by a non-partisan staff — could step in. Several groups have <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/george-santos-ethics-complaints-end-citizens-united-fec-oce-doj-2023-1">already filed complaints</a> with the office, which was established in 2008 precisely because members of Congress were failing to adequately investigate one another due to a kind of "detente" that existed between the parties when it came to ethics, according to Schuman. But House Republicans recently <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/house-gop-votes-gut-office-congressional-ethics-george-santos-fantastic-2023-1">passed a set of rule changes that hobbled OCE</a>, making it more difficult for them to hire new staff. Ironically, Santos <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/house-gop-votes-gut-office-congressional-ethics-george-santos-fantastic-2023-1">told Insider in January</a> that he thought the rules package was "fantastic," defending the changes.But despite these challenges, Santos still faces a range of investigations from law enforcement authorities outside of Congress, including federal investigations into his <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/01/27/santos-doj-investigation-fec/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">campaign finances</a> and his role in <a href="https://www.politico.com/news/2023/02/01/feds-probing-santos-service-dog-charity-scheme-00080706" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an alleged charity fraud scheme</a> involving a dying dog, along with a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/02/nyregion/george-santos-brazil.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">recently-revived fraud case in Brazil</a> and a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/28/nyregion/george-santos-long-island-investigation.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">variety of other state and local</a> investigations. Ultimately, experts say that Santos is more likely to face accountability from entities outside of Congress than those within. And the Department of Justice could simply ask both the Ethics Committee and OCE to stand down, as they've already <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/01/27/santos-doj-investigation-fec/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reportedly done</a> with the Federal Election Commission.Meredith McGehee, an ethics expert who's worked at both Issue One and the Campaign Legal Center, suggested that the committee — "known for its slow-walking" — is probably "keeping their fingers crossed" that the Department moves against Santos first. <h2>The 'built-in conflict' of members policing members</h2>With lawmakers asked to investigate other lawmakers — in this case, one whose vote is especially needed for the Republican majority in a closely-divided House chamber — members of the same party have a strong incentive to give the benefit of the doubt to the target of an investigation."That's the built-in conflict," said McGehee. "They need Santos's vote, and so far, he has proven to be a loyal soldier."The committee is evenly split between the parties, but a majority vote is required to open an investigation. In practice, it means any investigation into a lawmaker needs the sign-off of that person's party."Even though the members may strive to be fair, ultimately, the partisan composition and lack of independence mean that they will still be — to some extent — responsive to what their leadership wants," said Schuman.Thus McCarthy, despite his stated willingness to let the process play out, has more control over that same process than is immediately evident. Schuman pointed to the Ethics Committee's <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/madison-cawthorn-fine-house-ethics-committee-lgb-coin-cryptocurrency-2022-12">admonishment of former Rep. Madison Cawthorn</a>, who had fallen out of favor with McCarthy, as a key example of leadership allowing a legitimate investigation to move forward due to political considerations."The bottom line is that Santos will only be punished to the extent to which leadership and the Republicans are willing to let him be punished," said Schuman.<h2>'More serious investigation'</h2>But party leadership can't protect Santos forever. The Justice Department has <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/01/27/santos-doj-investigation-fec/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">reportedly told</a> the FEC to hold off on any enforcement action as it investigates Santos' campaign finances, signaling an active criminal probe.And the OCE, despite the new challenges it faces, can still pursue its own investigation of Santos.The office frequently makes preliminary investigations of complaints against members of Congress, making a referral to the House Ethics Committee if they determine the offense to warrant further inquiry. That recently happened with Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, who now <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-investigation-house-ethics-committee-2022-12">faces an ethics investigation</a> related to her attendance at the 2021 Met Gala.At the very least, it allows facts uncovered by investigators to come to light, rather than be suppressed for political reasons.Kedrick Payne, the senior director for ethics at the Campaign Legal Center and the one-time deputy chief counsel of OCE, said the office would likely conduct a "more serious investigation" of Santos than the Ethics Committee, which could simply choose to focus on <a href="https://www.ny1.com/nyc/all-boroughs/politics/2023/01/10/reps--torres--goldman-file-ethics-complaint-against-george-santos" target="_blank" rel="noopener">improprieties in the congressman's financial disclosures</a>.<div type="image" title="Santos walking through a tunnel beneath the Capitol on Wednesday." height="1500" width="1999" msid="97782673" hostid="261" sizebytes="136768"></div>"The committee, as a general matter, does not like to be aggressive with investigations," said Payne. "That's why the OCE was created."Schuman said that though it remains to be seen how OCE performs in the coming weeks given the changes, the harm lies with the message sent by changing the rules. "They're sending a message to the OCE staff that unless you do what we want, we're going to come for you," he said.But Santos may eventually face a criminal indictment, and eventually a conviction.If what's past is prologue, a conviction would be the point at which McCarthy would actively urge Santos to resign."When someone's convicted, it's time to resign," said McCarthy <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/kevin-mccarthy-convicted-republican-jeff-fortenberry-time-to-resign-2022-3">after Republican Rep. Fortenberry was convicted</a> of lying to the FBI in March of last year.The Nebraska congressman announced his resignation the following day.

The House Ethics Committee may not go after 'loyal soldier' George Santos, ethics experts warn

The dirty little secret on how congressional staff thrive in the always-on world of modern politics is doing moonlight work like 80-hour weeks, including unpaid Saturdays and Sundays

<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/financial-conflicts-congress-members-rated-2021-12"></a><div type="image" title="Sen. Richard Burr (R-NC) walks through the Senate Subway for a series of amendment votes in the Capitol Building on August 03, 2021 in Washington, DC. The Senate has moved on to the amendments process this week for the legislative text of the $1 trillion infrastructure bill, which aims to fund improvements to roads, bridges, dams, climate resiliency and broadband internet." height="1057" width="1409" msid="88300635" hostid="261"></div><ul class="summary-list"><li>Some experts see the SEC as the agency best suited to police <keyword id="11938290" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="insider-trading" source="Orion">insider trading</keyword> by members of <keyword id="11893699" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="congress" source="Orion">Congress</keyword>.</li><li>It is investigating GOP Sen. <keyword id="12205030" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="richard-burr" source="Orion">Richard Burr</keyword> and his brother-in-law over a stock sell-off.</li></ul>It was the <keyword id="12169748" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="stock-act" source="Orion">STOCK Act</keyword>'s moment in the sun.Days before the coronavirus pandemic gripped the United States and sent <keyword id="11893875" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="markets" source="Orion">markets</keyword> crashing, Sen. Richard Burr sold off a significant portion of his stocks, raising suspicion that he was trading based on inside information gleaned from daily intelligence briefings. The <keyword id="11897354" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="justice-department" source="Orion">Justice Department</keyword> opened a criminal investigation into whether Burr violated a law known as the Stop Trading on Congressional Knowledge, or STOCK, Act. After months of work, the department <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-closed-investigation-into-burr-pandemic-stock-trades-reports-2021-1">closed</a> the case without bringing charges against the Republican senator from North Carolina. The US Senate Select Committee on Ethics, meanwhile, has taken no public action against Burr.But Burr is not entirely cleared. Almost a year later, another enforcement agency — the Securities and Exchange Commission — continues to pursue him on civil grounds.The SEC's investigation presents a test of the agency's appetite for enforcing the STOCK Act, a 2012 law designed to defend against conflicts of interest and force lawmakers to become more transparent about their personal finances.But federal authorities have never prosecuted a federal lawmaker under the STOCK Act, and lawmakers have serially ignored the law's requirement to disclose their personal stock trades within 30 to 45 days of them being made.<div type="image" title="gary gensler sec chair" height="1330" width="1773" msid="88300637" hostid="261"></div><h2>The SEC is independent, but it can only do so much</h2>In interviews, former SEC and congressional staffers said the SEC has certain advantages over the Justice Department that could position it as the enforcement muscle behind the STOCK Act. Foremost, while the Justice Department has a tradition of independence, it nonetheless exists within an executive branch led by either a Republican or Democratic president.The SEC's status as an independent commission, with seats divided between Democratic and Republican appointees, could therefore protect it from criticism that cases are politically motivated. And the commission has decades of experience monitoring markets for unusual activity and bringing insider-trading cases."The SEC understands how the financial markets work and, frankly, has a lot of expertise in bringing insider-trading cases," said Tyler Gellasch, a former Senate aide who helped draft the STOCK Act. "It also helps that the SEC is an independent agency, so its actions are often viewed as more cautious, and less overtly partisan."An SEC spokesperson declined to comment.Still, hurdles abound for any law-enforcement agency in the policing of elected lawmakers' financial trading.In the Burr investigation, the Justice Department ran into novel legal issues surrounding the communications of lawmakers. For example, when the Justice Department seized Burr's cellphone, it needed to navigate around restrictions raised by the <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/22/politics/richard-burr-prosecutors-stocks/index.html">Constitution's speech or debate clause</a>, which broadly shields lawmakers from scrutiny over legislative activity.The SEC is nevertheless pressing ahead. The commission went to federal court in Manhattan to force <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/richard-burr-brother-in-law-gerald-fauth-dumped-stocks-2020-5">Burr's brother-in-law</a> Gerald Fauth to sit for an investigative interview. According to an SEC <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.568663/gov.uscourts.nysd.568663.4.0.pdf">filing</a>, <a href="https://www.propublica.org/article/burrs-brother-in-law-called-stock-broker-one-minute-after-getting-off-phone-with-senator">Burr called Fauth</a> after selling off more than $1.6 million in stock. After <a href="https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.568663/gov.uscourts.nysd.568663.4.0.pdf">50 seconds on the phone</a>, Fauth called his broker and dumped his own stock, the filing shows.Fauth sat for the interview in late November.<h2>Proving insider trading 'gets sticky'</h2>In the face of the Justice Department investigation, Burr said he <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-burr-idUSKBN29P04F">based his trading</a> on publicly available information about the emerging coronavirus, such as <keyword id="11893589" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="news" source="Orion">news</keyword> reports from CNBC. His case underscores how investigators can struggle to decipher when information — from a briefing or other closed-door setting — reaches the point of providing a degree of material, nonpublic detail that could lead to insider trading."Where it gets sticky is when the member of Congress has additional information that is not known to the public, that is more specific, and that a reasonable investor would want to know. And what the Burr case illustrates is the difficulty for the government of distinguishing between information that is, in some respects, public and, in other respects, not," said Daniel Hawke, a partner at the law firm Arnold &amp; Porter and former chief of the SEC's market-abuse unit.Hawke noted that the political sphere also features a wider exchange of information that would make it difficult for the SEC or another law-enforcement agency to draw a connection between a lawmaker's stock trade and inside information. For the SEC, it's not as simple as monitoring the trading around the time of a business move such as a merger or acquisition.Unlike an M&amp;A context, "where maybe only a handful of people working on a deal actually know what's going on, one of the challenges on the Hill is that it's an information exchange," Hawke said. "Information is being received and disseminated constantly. Figuring out how to surveil that, how to determine what information is significant and what information isn't — that's very difficult and time-consuming, and takes a lot of manual effort." <h2>The STOCK Act only goes so far</h2>While independent, the SEC also faces a real political dilemma when investigating a member of Congress.In 2019, former Rep. Chris Collins, a Republican from New York, pleaded guilty to insider trading and reached a settlement with the SEC resolving charges that he tipped his son off to negative trial results for a pharmaceutical drug. A federal judge later sentenced Collins to more than two years in prison, but then-President Donald Trump <a href="https://buffalonews.com/news/pardoned-by-trump-a-contrite-collins-returns-home-a-changed-man/article_4a914ae4-4608-11eb-9974-0715d91f7b6b.html">pardoned him</a> in December 2020. The STOCK Act didn't come into play in Collins' case because he learned of the negative trial results in his capacity as a member of the drug company's board, not as a member of Congress. The House and Senate have oversight powers over the agency and regularly summon the SEC leadership to appear at committee hearings. SEC Chair Gary Gensler <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9CL5WfevHjI">testified</a> before the House Committee on Financial Services in October.The SEC also relies on congressionally authorized funds for its annual budget, meaning that any investigation into a lawmaker is inherently an inquiry into the commission's appropriators.For government-ethics advocates, that state of affairs has revealed how Congress failed — perhaps by its own choosing — to set up a robust enforcement regime for the STOCK Act.The answer, advocates said, is to prohibit lawmakers from trading stocks while serving in Congress."That's the serious way to do this," said Meredith McGehee, a government ethics expert who lobbied on the STOCK Act."Everything else is a Band-Aid."

The SEC could be the last, best hope to keep members of Congress from insider trading. The agency already has one Republican senator on its radar.

<ul class="summary-list"><li>Experts are puzzled and stunned by the <keyword id="3198980" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Trump-campaign">Trump campaign</keyword>'s reported "money-bomb" ploy.</li><li>A New York Times investigation detailed how supporters were led to make recurring donations.</li><li>It's unclear whether the actions reported by The Times are illegal.</li></ul>Older donors who gave a few hundred dollars to former <keyword id="3828720" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="President-Donald-Trump">President Donald Trump</keyword>'s reelection campaign said they were shocked to see thousands drained from their accounts. Refund requests jumped in the final months of the campaign. The ensuing surges in credit-card-fraud claims associated with Trump got on the radar of the US's biggest banks. That's all according to a <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/03/us/politics/trump-donations.html">New York Times investigation published Saturday</a> that detailed a recurring-donation scheme it said was referred to as "the money bomb," which the Trump campaign used to pad its coffers in the final months of the campaign through the GOP fundraising platform <keyword id="11057640" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="winred">WinRed</keyword>.The tactics included added pre-checked recurring-donation boxes at the bottom of fundraising emails and an opt-out, instead of opt-in, system for recurring donations, The Times reported. As time drew closer to the election, the recurring donations went from monthly to weekly. And the fine print by those bright-yellow donation boxes became smaller and more confusing, leading to donors, including many older ones, unknowingly signing up to give thousands in contributions, the newspaper said. Read more: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/tulsi-gabbard-president-airbnb-political-committee-2021-4">Tulsi Gabbard's old presidential campaign committee appears to fall victim to thieves making unauthorized Airbnb charges</a>Asking for recurring donations is a common practice for Democratic campaigns and nonprofits too, but the Trump campaign's methods were particularly alarming to many experts. "Groups do this all the time in a nontoxic way, and, of course, Trump, being Trump, did this 72 million times in the wrong direction, and it started to look like fraud," Beth Rotman, the national director of money in <keyword id="6358883" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="100" keywordseo="politics">politics</keyword> and ethics at the advocacy group Common Cause, told Insider.The payments, according to The Times, essentially functioned as an "interest-free loan" from Trump's donors to his campaign, which faced upheaval and financial turmoil in the months leading up to the November 3 election. Eventually, tens of millions of donations were refunded over the course of 2020, with WinRed pocketing the transaction fees, The Times said.<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-nearly-went-broke-amid-200-million-budget-shortfall-2020-10"></a>Former Trump campaign manager Brad Parscale had booked nearly $200 million worth of TV ads with the expectation that a surge in last-minute donations would cover the cost, a misstep that "left the reelection effort dead broke by the start of October," <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-campaign-nearly-went-broke-amid-200-million-budget-shortfall-2020-10">Insider's Tom LoBianco reported</a>, citing Republicans close to Trump's campaign.The Trump campaign's recurring-donation ploy both perplexed and shocked even the most seasoned campaign-finance professionals interviewed by Insider.<div type="image" title="campaign sign" height="2010" width="4020" msid="81938951" hostid="261"></div><h2>'A complete rip-off' of a plan</h2>Fred Wertheimer, the president of <a href="https://democracy21.org/about-us">Democracy 21</a> who has been a leader in pivotal campaign-finance and ethics-reform battles in Congress and the courts over the past four decades, told Insider that he'd "never seen anything like this." "I've never seen anyone do what the Trump campaign just did," Wertheimer said, adding that the Trump campaign's behavior constituted elder abuse and was "below the bottom of the barrel" of acceptable fundraising tactics. "This is a complete rip-off. They knew exactly what they were doing," he added. "They knew they were tricking people into signing up for what they thought was one contribution, when they were really signing up for multiple contributions. Then when they got caught, they sent the money back. It's like if a bank robber got caught and said, 'Oh, well, I gave the money back.'"The highly unusual nature of the Trump campaign's methods was also reflected in the staggering rate of refunds, according to The Times. While it's routine for presidential campaigns - particularly those that operate at a large scale - to refund some contributions to donors who unknowingly gave over the legal limit, the sheer number of refund requests and the spike in refunds stuck out to experts and insiders. In all, the Trump campaign refunded $122 million in online donations, including 10.7% of its donations raised through WinRed, The Times reported. In contrast, President Joe Biden refunded $21 million of online donations and 2.2% of the donations that came in through <keyword id="9967990" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="actblue">ActBlue</keyword>."I've been here almost six years, and I can't think of anything particularly like this in which people did not know that they were making recurring contributions," Jordan Libowitz, the communications director for Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, told Insider. "Reimbursing 10% of donations is a massive, unbelievable amount."In a <a href="https://twitter.com/NatalieJHarp/status/1379151646177980416">lengthy Monday statement</a> issued through his Save America PAC, Trump denied the main claims in the article, saying that the Trump campaign always promptly refunded donations upon request and that there was a less than 1% rate of contributions subjected to formal disputes through credit-card companies. He also attacked The Times' reporting as "a completely misleading, one-sided hit piece" and continued to baselessly claim that the 2020 election was stolen.<div type="image" title="donald trump melania trump" height="2455" width="4911" msid="81938955" hostid="261"></div><h2>The law doesn't always account for every new campaign-finance ploy</h2>Experts interviewed by The Times and Insider all agreed that the Trump campaign's and WinRed's actions crossed an ethical line, especially regarding the older donors who said they were duped. But it's not clear whether their ploys ran afoul of campaign-finance or consumer-protection laws. "This is not a common thing we've seen before," Libowitz said. "It could be that this is a thing without a lot of regulation around it, just because laws follow issues."Rotman of Common Cause said the revelations about the Trump campaign presented a prime opportunity for agencies like the Federal Election Commission and lawmakers in Congress to set updated regulations and standards for solicitation of recurring online donations. "It's not really fraud, but it's potential trickery," Rotman said of the Trump camp's tactics. "You're talking about attempts at trickery, and you need anti-trickery regulations and statutes. And you can do that with clearer guidance and enforcement. It should not be so easy for people to be mystified as to how much they're giving and how often."Craig Holman, a campaign-finance and ethics lobbyist for the democracy watchdog Public Citizen, told Insider federal campaign-finance laws and the Internal Revenue Code mainly prohibit soliciting campaign donations over the legal limit, not necessarily the tactics used in these solicitations. "I have never seen a fundraising practice for candidates and party committees like this before, but the laws and regulations governing solicitations are quite lax," Holman said. "It could be argued that the solicitation method would likely cause illegal contributions beyond the contribution limits, but it appears that refunds were made in such cases, so it is unlikely that legal action could be taken against the Trump campaign and WinRed."<a href="https://www.issueone.org/staff/meredith-mcgehee/">Meredith McGehee</a>, the executive director of the campaign-finance-reform advocacy group Issue One, told Insider the Trump campaign's activities raised new questions about the intersection of <keyword id="1076393" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="campaign-finance">campaign finance</keyword> and consumer protection, including whether fundraising platforms like WinRed would be held to the same standards as other businesses, especially for actions that could be seen as preying on older people. "Basic consumer law is that you give consumers clear and noticeable notification that a pledge is going to happen," she said. "It sounds in the case of just pure consumer law that this failed the test of people knowing what they're getting into."Long term, WinRed's mandate to make a profit and catch up to its political opponents on the Democratic side in the online-fundraising game creates an incentive structure more permissive of cutting corners that goes into ethical gray areas like this, McGehee added."It's important to note that WinRed is structured as a for-profit entity as opposed to ActBlue, which is nonprofit. When you're a for-profit company, the incentives to make these things clear are less strong - they're a business and their job is to make money," she said. "Since they're operating as a business, the question I would raise immediately is: Is this good business practice?"Even if the Trump campaign and WinRed don't face immediate consequences from federal agencies, the damning allegations may hurt the platform going forward and, by extension, the GOP."The highly unethical and deceptive fundraising practices will inevitably take its toll," Holman told Insider. "These donors are quite unlikely to give a campaign donation again to Trump and WinRed."

'A complete rip-off': Campaign-finance experts puzzled and stunned by Trump camp's reported 'money-bomb' ploy

Good morning! Welcome back to <keyword id="10669910" type="UNKNOWN" weightage="60" keywordseo="10-things-in-politics">10 Things in Politics</keyword>. I'm Brent Griffiths. <a href="http://newsletter.businessinsider.com/join/10-things-in-politics">Sign up here to get this newsletter in your inbox each day.</a>Send your tips and thoughts to <a href="mailto:bgriffiths@insider.com">bgriffiths@insider.com</a> or tweet me<a href="https://twitter.com/BrentGriffiths"> @BrentGriffiths</a>.Here's what you need to know:<ul><li><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/nih-covid-vaccine-schedule-rollout-federal-employees-fauci-biden-collins-2021-2">The agency that helped develop the COVID-19 vaccine can't vaccinate all of its workers.</a></li><li><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-watch-gamestop-robinhood-reddit-congress-hearing-testify-thursday-2021-2">Lawmakers will grill those behind the GameStop stock fiasco later today.</a></li><li><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/post/preview?post_id=602dca3c86b3792aad5c9d05&amp;mode=desktopktop">Tom Steyer praises the Biden administration's early climate actions.</a></li></ul>1. FIRST THING FIRST: Vaccine struggles are being felt by many. Case in point, we're starting this morning off with an exclusive scoop on how the agency responsible for distributing COVID-19 vaccines<a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/nih-covid-vaccine-schedule-rollout-federal-employees-fauci-biden-collins-2021-2"> can't get enough for its own workers</a>.The National Institutes of Health has been at the forefront of the coronavirus vaccine work. Internal emails obtained by Insider show the agency has "exhausted" its vaccine supplies after vaccinating 3,000 of its employees.<ul><li>What we don't know: It's not clear how many NIH employees who worked directly on the vaccine have received the shot. We do know that NIH Director Francis Collins, Dr. Anthony Fauci, and Kizzmekia Corbett, the lead scientist on the vaccine project, have all received it.</li></ul>Not all agencies are created equal: "The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention decided last year that the workers at the Bureau of Prisons, the Indian Health Service, the State Department, the Defense Department, and the Department of Veteran's Affairs should be first to get vaccinated."<ul><li>Where those efforts stand: "At the VA, 68% of workers were vaccinated as of February 10. The State Department had vaccinated 11,500 people both in the US and abroad as of January 28, according to an agency spokesperson."</li></ul><a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/nih-covid-vaccine-schedule-rollout-federal-employees-fauci-biden-collins-2021-2">Read their entire report here.</a><div type="image" title="texas winter weather storm ice" height="3678" width="4904" msid="81090010" hostid="261"></div>2. Millions of Texans remain without power: <a href="https://www.insider.com/texans-share-accounts-of-water-shortages-burst-pipes-flooded-homes-2021-2">At least 20 people have died</a> from weather-related incidents. One couple said they had been <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-blackouts-millions-lost-power-in-storm-went-wrong-2021-2">without power for 61 hours</a>. Hospitals, per the Texas Tribune, <a href="https://www.texastribune.org/2021/02/17/austin-texas-hospitals-power-outage-water/">are running out of water</a>. It didn't have <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/texas-blackouts-millions-lost-power-in-storm-went-wrong-2021-2">to be this bad</a>. FEMA is <a href="https://www.wfaa.com/article/news/local/texas/fema-supplying-generators-diesel-water-blankets-white-house-spokesperson-says-president-biden/287-ed21eb04-16b5-4b17-9ce8-8b56f9d73150">sending generators, fuel, water, </a>and blankets among other assistance.<ul><li>Former Gov. Rick Perry wrote that Texans <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/rick-perry-says-texans-would-rather-blackouts-than-regulate-power-grid-2021-2">would rather endure than join the federal energy grid</a>: "Texans would be without electricity for longer than three days to keep the federal government out of their business," Perry, a Republican who was also Energy secretary, wrote in a blog post.</li></ul>3. Tom Steyer dishes on Biden's environmental efforts: "Across the board, he's lived up to what he said he was going to do, including Paris," said Steyer, the former presidential candidate and billionaire climate activist.He added that he's been in touch with the Biden administration, but was noncommittal on what his role will be, including as a potential ambassador or working in D.C. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/post/preview?post_id=602dca3c86b3792aad5c9d05&amp;mode=desktopktop">Read the entire exclusive interview here.</a>4. Lawmakers are set to grill those behind the GameStop stock craze: A stonk boi, hedge fund managers, a Reddit official, and the top executive of the Robinhood app that helped make their saga possible will all testify before Congress this afternoon. <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/how-to-watch-gamestop-robinhood-reddit-congress-hearing-testify-thursday-2021-2">Here's how you can watch</a>.5. Gov. Andrew Cuomo's moment is over: Cuomo was once hailed for his pandemic response. Now, <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/cuomo-faces-federal-investigation-over-handling-of-covid-19-2021-2">he's facing a slew of recriminations</a>. Fellow New York Democrats in the state Senate <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/cuomo-faces-federal-investigation-over-handling-of-covid-19-2021-2">are preparing to strip him </a>of his emergency powers, <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/17/nyregion/cuomo-nursing-homes-deaths.html?action=click&amp;module=Top%20Stories&amp;pgtype=HomepageHomepage">per The New York Times</a>. The FBI and the US attorney in Brooklyn are probing the Cuomo administration's handling of nursing homes during the pandemic, <a href="http://timesunion.com/news/article/cuomo-investigation-fbi-covid-nursing-homes-15957401.php">per the Times Union</a>.6. The top things for your calendar, all times Eastern:<ul><li>10:45 a.m.: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi holds her weekly news conference.</li><li>11:15 a.m.: Vice President Harris holds a virtual meeting with top women lawmakers and advocacy organizations to discuss the stimulus plan.</li><li>12:00 p.m. The House Financial Services Committee's GameStop hearing.</li><li>12:30 p.m.: Jen Psaki holds the White House's daily press briefing.</li></ul>7. Biden's immigration plan will be introduced in Congress later today: "The package would provide an 8-year path to citizenship for 11 million undocumented people - slashed to three years for eligible farmworkers; people brought to the US as children; and those who were granted temporary protected status for fleeing natural and manmade disasters." <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/biden-immigration-reform-bill-to-be-introduced-in-congress-2021-2">Read the details here</a>.<div type="image" title="Rush Limbaugh" height="1334" width="1778" msid="81090014" hostid="261"></div>8. Rush Limbaugh's legacy: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/rush-limbaugh-conservative-talk-radio-host-dead-2021-2">The conservative talk radio host</a> died Wednesday at the age of 70. He announced last year that he had advanced lung cancer. President <a href="https://www.businessinsider.com/rush-limbaugh-legacy-consequential-figure-american-politics-fairness-doctrine-2021-2">Trump said Limbaugh's show was a major reason</a> he was able to win the Republican nomination. Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich added that the GOP would have never broken Democrats' stranglehold on the House in 1994 without the man who became the nation's most popular talk radio host.From the obits: <ul><li>"Limbaugh mocked Democrats and liberals, touted a traditional Midwestern, moralistic patriotism and presented himself on the air as a biting but jovial know-it-all who pontificated 'with half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair,' as he often said," Marc Fisher <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/rush-limbaugh-dead/2021/02/17/61bacd24-e04b-11e7-8679-a9728984779c_story.html">writes in The Washington Post.</a> </li><li>"He became a singular figure in the American media, fomenting mistrust, grievances and even hatred on the right for Americans who did not share their views, and he pushed baseless claims and toxic rumors long before Twitter and Reddit became havens for such disinformation," Robert D. McFadden and Michael M. Grynbaum <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2021/02/17/business/media/rush-limbaugh-dead.html?action=click&amp;module=Top%20Stories&amp;pgtype=HomepageHomepage">write in The New York Times</a>.</li></ul>9. Naomi Osaka bested Serena Williams in the Australian Open: <a href="https://www.insider.com/serena-williams-cries-retirement-question-australian-open-crowd-2021-2">Williams grew emotional while contemplating retirement</a> after losing in straight sets in the semifinal of the major tournament. "I don't know. If I ever say farewell, I wouldn't tell anyone," Williams said.10. Our Happy place: Adam Sandler marked the 25th anniversary of his smash hit "Happy Gilmore" by <a href="https://www.insider.com/adam-sandler-recreates-happy-gilmore-golf-shot-25th-anniversary-2021-2">recreating his iconic drive</a>. Sandler called out fictional golf pro Shooter McGavin, played by Christopher McDonald, who responded in kind. And we know somewhere, Bob Barker is saying Happy's had enough. One last thing. Today's trivia question: Today's question comes from Meredith McGehee. Current senators are deceptively quick (as this author can attest), but once a senator set a world record for the 100-yard-dash for seniors. Who is it? Hint: He also ran ... for president. Email your response and a suggested question to me at <a href="mailto:bgriffiths@insider.com">bgriffiths@insider.com</a><ul><li>Yesterday's answer: President Nixon redesigned the White House guard uniforms <a href="https://www.whitehousehistory.org/the-press-was-not-impressed">before relenting amid withering criticism</a>. True to one of the barbs, <a href="http://www.weirduniverse.net/blog/comments/nixon_palace_guard">Iowa high schoolers</a> and a Utah college later used them to outfit marching band members. But that's not even the craziest part. The state of Utah went against none other than Alice Cooper when they bid for them. <a href="https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1356&amp;dat=19800808&amp;id=1qVPAAAAIBAJ&amp;sjid=DgYEAAAAIBAJ&amp;pg=3496,3998780;pg=3496,3998780">Alas for the rocker, this time school was not out</a>.</li></ul>

10 Things in Politics: Vaccine woes touch everyone - even the agency that helped develop them

<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table float_right"><div><div class="image on-image">REUTERS/Gary CameronEric Trump, Donald Trump Jr., and Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump attend the ground breaking of the Trump International Hotel at the Old Post Office Building in Washington July 23, 2014.</div></div></div>Now that Donald Trump is president-elect of the United States, he'll need to decide what to do with the businesses that helped make him famous. And, his current solution is doing little to prevent a huge conflict of interest. Trump is the chairman and president of the Trump Organization, a conglomerate that owns properties around the world including commercial spaces, hotels, and golf courses. While the Trump Organization is primarily a real-estate holding company, it also owns brands including books, such as "The Art of the Deal," and Trump Natural Spring Water. Trump has said, as president, he has<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-business-doesnt-matter-but-still-leaving-kids-in-charge-2016-11"> little interest in his business</a> and plans to separate himself from the company, handing control over to the next generation. His three oldest children - Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric - currently serve as executive vice presidents of the Trump Organization.<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-giuliani-says-trump-kids-could-run-blind-trust-2016-11">On Sunday</a>,<a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/ap-giuliani-says-trump-kids-could-run-blind-trust-2016-11"> </a>Rudy Giuliani reiterated Trump's plan to set up a variation on a "blind trust," in which the three children take over the business. Once Trump is president, Giuliani said "there will have to be a wall" between him and his children "with regard to government matters." Trump could potentially sign a document promising that he would not have any input or active interest in his business.<div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image"><a href="http://www.gettyimages.com/license/56682260">Carlo Allegri/Getty Images</a>A 2005 photo of Donald Jr., Ivanka, and Eric Trump.</div></div></div>Trump's decisions so far as president-elect have done little to separate his children from his <keyword id="6358883" type="PERSON" weightage="60" keywordseo="Politics">politics</keyword>. All three children who have been tapped to take over Trump Organization are on the executive committee of Trump's transition team. Even if they do refrain from discussing politics and business with their father after his inauguration, they are currently in a position to help appoint others to roles that could create beneficial policies and conditions for the Trump Organization. Further, while Trump and his advisors have repeatedly used the phrase "blind trust," entrusting Trump Organization to his children is not a blind trust at all. Most US presidents put their investments in a blind trust for the length of their presidency,<a href="http://www.npr.org/2016/06/09/481351291/if-elected-president-would-trump-put-his-investments-in-a-blind-trust"> NPR reported, </a>because they use an independent financial advisor free of potential conflicts of interest. The Trump children are not an independent third-party, separate from their father, meaning that their takeover would not be "blind." "The fact that they have been included as part of the transition team just shows how inappropriate their role in bridging the gap between him as a businessman and politician is," Meredith McGehee, a strategic adviser at the Campaign Legal Center, told<a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/11/11/donald-trumps-questionable-blind-trust-setup-just-got-more-questionable/"> the Washington Post.</a> "It's a clear demonstration that there is no firewall between the two."Further, even if Trump does purposefully divorce himself from Trump Organization, since his name is so closely tied to his business, attempting to separate the president-elect's decisions as a politician from those of businessman would be complicated. Throughout the presidential campaign, Trump's actions as a politician directly impacted his business - and not in a way that benefitted the president-elect. Visits to Trump-branded hotels, casinos, and golf courses have slumped since Trump announced his candidacy in June 2015, according to data <a href="https://medium.com/foursquare-direct/update-how-the-trump-presidential-campaign-is-affecting-trump-businesses-5f20a6aae078#.vw5a9wyyi">collected by Foursquare. </a><div class="KonaFilter image-container display-table"><div><div class="image on-image">Carlo Allegri/ReutersDonald Trump cuts the ribbon at his new Trump International hotel in Washington, DC, U.S., October 26 2016.</div></div></div>Throughout the presidential campaign, Trump made an effort to promote his brand. In October, for example, Trump took time off from campaigning to attend the ribbon-cutting ceremony at the Trump International Hotel in Washington, DC, just a few blocks from the White House.The Trump Organization did not respond to Business Insider's request for comment. Trump didn't release his tax returns during his campaign for president and still<a href="https://twitter.com/hunterw/status/798151694211235840"> doesn't plan to while under audit</a> (despite the fact it is legally possible), making it difficult to judge how wealthy he really is. A financial disclosure form that Trump was required to fill out revealed in May that he had at least $1.5 billion in assets. Trump has boasted that he is worth more than $10 billion.President-elect Trump has said that, once he is president, he has no interest in the well-being of his business."Who cares? This is big league stuff. This is our country. Our country is going bad. We're going to save our country," <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/trump-says-business-doesnt-matter-but-still-leaving-kids-in-charge-2016-11">Trump said in an interview with "60 Minutes" </a>that aired on Sunday. "I don't care about hotel occupancy. It's peanuts compared to what we're doing - health care, making people better. It's unfair what's happened to the people of our country and we're going to change it, it's as simple as that."In the interview, Ivanka agreed with her father, saying his presidency and the state of the country "is so much more important and more serious" than the Trump business. <div class="margin-top"> <h3>NOW WATCH: <a href="http://www.businessinsider.com/compared-prices-trader-joes-items-whole-foods-365-everyday-value-2016-11">We compared prices of Trader Joe's items to those of Whole Foods 365 Everyday Value - here's what we found</a></h3> <div> <div> <div class="ooyala-video-player" data-video-autoplay="false" data-video-id="FncHFhNzE6a9K4kK8FR9btnfNrYTTCj9" data-player-variable="ooyalapopvideo" id="ooyalaplayer_popvideo" style="width:1280px;height:720px"></div> </div> </div> </div>

You Searched For "meredith mcgehee" and got 9 results

How more than $422 million in taxpayer money got locked away in a forgotten government fund and lawmakers won't spend it or return it

Dave Levinthal

How more than $427 million in taxpayer money is locked away in a forgotten government fund and lawmakers won't spend it or return it

Dave Levinthal

It's still not clear what the Senate Ethics Committee is doing with a 2-year-old January 6 probe into Ted Cruz and Josh Hawley

Bryan Metzger

The House Ethics Committee may not go after 'loyal soldier' George Santos, ethics experts warn

Bryan Metzger

The dirty little secret on how congressional staff thrive in the always-on world of modern politics is doing moonlight work like 80-hour weeks, including unpaid Saturdays and Sundays

Kimberly Leonard,Warren Rojas…

The SEC could be the last, best hope to keep members of Congress from insider trading. The agency already has one Republican senator on its radar.

C. Ryan Barber

'A complete rip-off': Campaign-finance experts puzzled and stunned by Trump camp's reported 'money-bomb' ploy

Grace Panetta

10 Things in Politics: Vaccine woes touch everyone - even the agency that helped develop them

Brent D. Griffiths

Trump's plan for what will happen to his businesses when he's president has a massive flaw

Kate Taylor

Popular Keywords

Buying Guides