Folks, this incestuous relationship between David Vitter’s campaign and his Super PAC, Fund for Louisiana’s Future (FLF), just keeps getting more and more entangled and you have to wonder how long it’s going to take for the Louisiana Board of Ethics to become involved.
(Before I go any further, I would like to thank yet another sharp-eyed reader who steered me to the latest plot twist with a brief email on Monday morning.)
On Wednesday, Oct. 21, we posted a story about Baton Rouge attorney/lobbyist Jimmy Burland’s email of Oct. 20 “To the Louisiana Lobbyist Community” in which he solicited lobbyists’ attendance (and $5,000 checks) at a string of receptions across the state in the days following Saturday’s primary election.
“We need to raise more than $3 million for the runoff and we hope you will join us in maxing out $5,000 contributions from you and each of your clients,” he wrote, “bundling as much as possible as soon as possible!”
There are more than 800 lobbyists who work the Capitol in Baton Rouge and while some represent a single client, most of them have several clients. So if a lobbyist receiving Burland’s email has, say, five clients, Burland is asking the lobbyist to not only chip in $5,000, but to coerce all five clients into also ponying up the $5,000 maximum, thus allowing the lobbyist to “bundle” a cool $30,000. If any of the clients happens to have a political action committee (PAC), other companies under its corporate umbrella, and the client company’s CEO is married and has children, the $5,000 contributions can increase exponentially.
Pretty soon at that rate, you’re talking about real money—money that gets a politician’s ear when the chips are on the legislative line. Need a bill granting a special tax break for one of your clients? If you bundled several multiples of $5,000 at one of the eight receptions, the governor will see to it that floor leaders in the House and Senate carry the water for you.
But here’s the kicker with Burland’s email (to which our anonymous friend alerted us): “Please make check(s) payable to David Vitter for Louisiana and bring to one of his events or mail to 6048 Marshall Foch St., New Orleans, LA 70124. You may also contact Ms. Courtney Guastella for more information at 504-615-2083 or (email) at courtney@davidvitter.com.” (Bold emphasis Burland’s, italic emphasis ours.) https://louisianavoice.com/2015/10/21/baton-rouge-attorneylobbyist-tries-to-strongarm-lobbyists-on-behalf-of-david-vitter-via-email-for-5000-contributions/
Courtney Guastella is actually Courtney Guastella Callihan, wife of Capital One Bank director Bill Callihan and she is Vitter’s campaign finance director.
But the Callihan’s residence is also the address of the Fund for Louisiana’s Future (FLF), Vitter’s Super PAC.
By law, there is supposed to be an arm’s length relationship between candidate and Super PAC. While communications are allowed, discussions of campaign strategy between the two are strictly forbidden.
And the Justice Department has been increasing scrutiny of the cozy relationship between candidates and Super PACs. A Virginia campaign operative was convicted in February of this year. Tyler Harber was sentenced to two years in prison for illegal coordination between a campaign and a purportedly independent ally (read: Super Pac).
Harber admitted in court that he helped create a Super PAC and arranged for it to purchase $325,000 in ads to help the campaign of 2012 unsuccessful congressional candidate Chris Perkins.
“The opportunity to commit the crime (of campaign strategy coordination) has increased dramatically,” said U.S. Justice Department spokesperson Peter Carr. At the same time, however, he said, “Illegal coordination is difficult to detect.”
The Justice Department’s increasing presence in prosecuting such cases comes as complaints to the Federal Election Commission (FEC) have stalled. The FEC has failed to move ahead with coordination investigations since the 2010 Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court triggered an explosion of big money PACs. For state elections, the responsibility for investigation lies with the State Board of Ethics which was gutted by Bobby Jindal in 2008. So, in effect, there is little to no oversight over PACs in state elections.
This is yet another unseen consequence of the Citizens United decision which removed citizen participation in the political process and placed it in the hands of multi-national corporations, Wall Street, big pharma, big business, and big oil by allowing them to purchase the politicians of their choice.
On close examination, FEC regulations say that campaigns (candidates) may convey needs (as in contributions) to Super PACs. Those regulations are generally tracked by the State Board of Ethics. Operatives on both sides may communicate to each other directly so long as they do not discuss campaign strategy. A PAC may also confer with a campaign about “issue ads” featuring a candidate, prompting some legal experts to believe that a Super PAC could even share its entire paid media plan as long as no one on the candidate’s team responds.
Lee Goodman, a Republican appointee to the FEC, said the courts have said that friendships and knowledge between Super PAC and candidate cannot be prohibited. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/here-are-the-secret-ways-super-pacs-and-campaigns-can-work-together/2015/07/06/bda78210-1539-11e5-89f3-61410da94eb1_story.html
But where do you draw the line of separation between candidate and Super PAC?
FLF claims it has nothing to do with Vitter’s campaign and that “written confidentiality and firewall policies are in place to ensure that Fund for Louisiana’s Future will in no way coordinate its political communications or activities with any candidates, their committee or their agents.” http://dailykingfish.com/tag/fund-for-louisianas-future/
And yet, the address of Vitter’s campaign finance director and FLF are one and the same.
Where is the line of separation?
And Opensecrets.org shows that Vitter’s campaign has infused at least $890,000 into FLF. http://www.opensecrets.org/outsidespending/contrib_all.php?cycle=2014&type=A&cmte=C00541037&page=1
Where is the line of separation?
Likewise, Courtney Callihan, nee Guastella, made 25 contributions totaling $148,381 to FLF between March of 2013 and November of 2014. Guastella, Courtney
Where is the line of separation?
On Friday, the day before the primary election, Vitter and Callihan were involved in a minor traffic accident in Metairie. Callihan was driving and Vitter was the passenger when Callihan hit a second vehicle. Vitter was quickly transported from the scene by a campaign staff member. https://louisianavoice.com/2015/10/25/minor-auto-accident-could-further-undermine-vitter-bid-for-governor-federal-campaign-finance-law-violations-possible/
On the one hand, Vitter was riding with his campaign finance director. On the other, he was riding with the person who shares an address with FLF.
Where is the line of separation?
Does anyone really believe that Vitter never discusses campaign strategy with Callihan?
Likewise, does anyone believe that Callihan never consults with FLF on campaign strategy?
Where is the line of separation?
Where is the Louisiana Board of Ethics?
Where is the Attorney General’s Office?
Louisiana Voice 
I can tell you where they are!
Looking the other way, so they get there piece of the pie!!!!
We do not need another Rhodes Scholar like Jindal!!!! He took us for a ride and Vitter will finish sending us down the gutter!!!! VOTE EDWARDS ! ! ! ! !
Could it be that he was quickly transported away from the scene precisely because he knew that being in the same vehicle with Courtney would not look good. Someone might put these things together, i.e. that he was in the car, that she was listed on the Burland letter as the contact, and that the letter called for contributions to be brought to one of the receptions or mailed to the address of FLF. People might ask why they were in the same vehicle, where were they going? People might also ask – was the money to be deposited in the FLF account or some other Vitter campaign account? Also those same curious folks might want to know who is actually paying the bills for/funding these receptions? If you can tell me that there is no coordination after all of that well….as they say “I have a nice bridge…..” Or to paraphrase a popular commercial – “How can they not be coordinating what is in their wallet.” Because from here it looks like the same wallet!!
Just saying or rather asking…..
I would be shocked if the LA AG or the LA Ethics Board, or even the local mainstream media acknowledged what is clearly going on here. But I do expect that someone at the federal level should be attending to this sooner or later as the story is traveling beyond state lines. I have an idea for the next reality TV show: Louisiana Government! You couldn’t concoct a more unbelievable political story if you tried. What next?
Perhaps it is time to do a FOIA and/or public records request for emails between Vitter and staff, staff and FLF, Vitter and Courtney, etc. and see just how wide and thick the wall is between them. Oh that is right it is supposed to be an arms length…looks like the arms length is a really tight hug!
None of those are public agencies nor do they receive taxpayer dollars, so they are not required to respond to FOIA requests.
But Vitter his high self is a public “servant” and I use the term with great indignity. His communications are not protected are they?
Sadly, don’t expect the F.E.C. to do much of anything even when they want to.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/03/us/politics/fec-cant-curb-2016-election-abuse-commission-chief-says.html
Ok the F.E.C. by its own admission are incapable of any action so our country should save $1 million plus annually in bipartisan waste by eliminating it. We have a state Attorney General and a toothless Ethics Board who (A) will not and (B) cannot do anything about the obvious disregard of federal and state laws being broken by David Vitter. If a law is being broken then why waste any time with worthless public officials, boards, and commissions? Let the FBI enforce our laws. I, for one, am sick and tired of politicians creating these levels of obstruction, purported to exist to be our public watchdog, when in reality they immediately render them powerless and continue to flaunt their disregard for our laws with impunity. Although I wish our federal government would take action I don’t think it will happen. Therefore it is critical that the public maintains its own vigilance and keep our fellow citizens aware of the abuses that elected officials and candidates commit. I again applaud the wonderful service that Tom Aswell, and other journalists like him, do in bringing awareness to all who will listen. Thank you Mr. Aswell.
It looks like the only practical hope is to get this information in front if as many voters as possible as part of a campaign to inform them about Vitter’s character. Or more accurately, his lack of character. Each of us needs to talk to all our friends, encourage them to talk to their friends, post on Facebook, write letters to the editor, try to get questions asked at debates and smaller meetings, try to get LPB and NPR interested, etc.
This is one time I hope a candidate or “friend” will do negative advertising. Including, if possible, clips from Jay Dardenne’s last ad:
To add to your “Where are…?” questions. Where are the voters? The voters have power to do something about the corruption, if they use it. Let’s hope the voters step up to the plate on Nov. 21 and say a resounding YES to JBE, and a resounding NO to corruption.
“Courtney Guastella is actually Courtney Guastella Callihan, wife of Capital One Bank director Bill Callihan and she is Vitter’s campaign finance director.”
It’s not surprising to see Capital One behind Vitter’s superpac. They would be one of the foremost promoters of and possibly one of the foremost beneficiaries of infrastructure privatization schemes currently being pushed in this state via financing for the special interest purchase of such infrastructure. Should Vitter somehow win, I would expect to see this kind of activity to increase along with further shifting of the tax base onto the lower income classes, reduced services and increased tax cuts to the higher income classes. It certainly fits the Republican “business model.” One can only wonder why small business owners, the majority of which call themselves Republican, haven’t caught on to the fact that none of this will benefit them in any significant way, but will contribute to further impoverishing their customer base. Through empirical evidence we can see that austerity destroys markets.
As has been noted by others, there is no line of separation, because there is no enforcement by the FEC if candidates break the rules and coordinate with superpacs. How much closer can the connection be when a candidate’s finance director lists the same address as the superpac? If I had a CapitalOne credit card, I would cancel it.
The robocalls coming to my house smearing Edwards are sickeningly full of lies calling John Bel a liberal, and they sing the same old song, “Obama, Obama, Obama”. Is this the best they can do with all that money? Pathetic.
…sing the same old song, “Obama, Obama, Obama”.
They doth protest too much! Any progressive worth his/her salt has known Obama is a closet economic neoliberal from the time he placed Rubinites in the Dept. of Treasury. It’s mere pap for easily influenced political illiterates who like to wear the herd label, which is why our political system has more and more taken on the attributes of a popularity contest.