For immediate release: Monday, October 28, 2013

For more information: Bill Mahoney, (518) 817-3738

FACT-CHECKING THE NEW YORK STATE BOARD OF ELECTIONS The Board of Elections testimony tonight is based on two contradictory claims: They have a terrific track record of enforcing Election Law and they do not have a terrific track record of enforcing Election Law solely because they do not have enough resources. Obviously, both statements taken together cannot be true. Thus, it is worth fact-checking some of their specific claims: Claim: There is a high level of compliance; most committees file disclosure reports on time. Reality: A month after the July 2012 filing period, nearly 40% of committees with money in the bank had not reported a single transaction. 622 committees with over $12 million in the bank had not filed any disclosure report whatsoever. Claim: The Boards 1994 software system does not meet campaign finance enforcement requirements. Reality: While outdated technology is a very real problem, there is a lot the Board can do with what they have. Identifying overcontributors and notifying filers who have submitted incomplete information are examples of tasks that are fairly simple even with their existing technology. Claim: Many of the 103,805 unenforced violations of election law in the past two years that have been identified by NYPIRG are minor in nature Reality: Many of these violations are relatively minor, but they can often obfuscate more serious violations. For example, how is the Board supposed to know which donors gave over their legal limits in a calendar year if they dont even know which year donations were made in? Notifying filers of these problems would take minimal effort, but the failure to do so illustrates how the Board has no interest in the enforcement of the law. Claim: Most violations of the law, such as corporations that give over $5,000 in a calendar year, are permissible, since violators do not know they are exceeding contribution limits. Reality: Many corporate donors give over the legal limit for years in a row. There is no evidence the Board even issues warnings to donors who repeatedly violate contribution limits. Claim: The centralized disclosure of local filers in 2005 led to an increase in the number of filers by more than 800%. Reality: Only 39% of committees that are currently active are local committees that file as a result of the 2005 law. Most of the new committees that account for this growth of more than 800% are state-level committees that were entirely unaffected by this broadening of the disclosure requirement. The Board also frequently mentions the lager number of committees they

have to regulate; tonights testimony refers to approximately 12,500. This double-counts thousands of filers: the real number is currently 7,318. Claim: The Boards creation of the LLC Loophole was necessitated by law. Reality: Other campaign finances entities, notably the FEC, developed opinions on the political status of LLCs. Using almost identical statutory language, they have developed campaign finance regulations much more stringent than those created by the Board, whose decision has opened up a new front for huge amounts of special interest money. Claim: The Board would do a better job if they had more staffers Reality: The New York State budget for fiscal year 2007-08 gave the Board money to drastically increase their enforcement staff. Most of these positions were never filled, and the Board exerted no effort to fill them. As discussed above, there are plenty of enforcement actions that would be relatively simple to execute with their current staff. Clearly, theyre simply not interested in beefing up their enforcement operations.