Section 5.3: Federal Election Commission
“Because the FEC is an independent agency and not a division or office directly within the executive branch, the authority of the President over the actions of the FEC is extremely limited.”
I would argue that because a President was a candidate before he or she became President, the President shouldn’t have undue influence over the FEC.
Full contextual analysis of Section 5.3: Federal Election Commission here.
“Thus, by convention, a Republican President will nominate a Republican and a Democrat for two open commission slots, including the choice of the Democrat Senate leader for his party’s seat. In turn, the senator will direct his party to vote to confirm both nominees. In the almost 50-year history of the FEC, this tradition has only been broken once—when Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid refused to approve one of George W. Bush’s nominees (Hans von Spakovsky) for a Republican commission slot.”
If I were literally the only FEC commissioner in history that the Senate refused to confirm, I’m not sure I’d mention it. Impressive grudge-holding, though.
Full contextual analysis of Section 5.3: Federal Election Commission here.
“The President assuming office in 2025 must ensure, if the three Republican commissioners do not wish to remain on the FEC past their terms, that nominees for these positions share the views of those commissioners.”
More arguments for staffing the federal government with regime loyalists, here.
Full contextual analysis of Section 5.3: Federal Election Commission here.
“The President should direct the DOJ and the attorney general not to prosecute individuals under an interpretation of the law with which the FEC—the expert agency designated by Congress to enforce the law civilly and issue regulations establishing the standards under which the law is applied—does not agree.”
So, we’re going to staff the government with loyalists, then decline to prosecute campaign finance violations. The reason this is important to point out, is that Trump is currently in violation of campaign finance laws, because he’s illegally using his campaign funding to pay his private legal bills.
The Trump campaign has also been accused in court of violating reporting requirements, contribution limits, and other requirements.
Full contextual analysis of Section 5.3: Federal Election Commission here.
“It is fundamentally unfair for the DOJ to prosecute an individual for supposedly violating the law when the FEC has previously determined that a similarly situated individual has not violated the law.”
von Spakovsky fails to provide any examples of what he’s talking about here.
Full contextual analysis of Section 5.3: Federal Election Commission here.