Exploiting the political process for personal gain will not be tolerated, and we will continue to pursue those who commit such illegal actionsMr. Kent Sorenson was indicted and now has pled guilty in a matter involving falsified campaign finance reports. One campaign paid him to switch his support from another, and the compensation was routed through other vendors to the campaign to conceal money paid for his changed candidate preference. His guilty plea covers the federal reporting violation and the obstruction of justice committed when he denied publicly that he had been paid for his switch in allegiance and asserted that anybody who doubted him could simply consult the campaign’s reports where they would not find any such compensation.
Acting Assistant Director in Charge of FBI Field Office, on the Sorenson Indictment
As a straightforward reporting offense, Mr. Sorenson's case is of limited interest. But another question, presented squarely by the comments of the senior FBI official, is whether the criminal laws reach compensated political endorsements that are openly disclosed. Is it true, as this official suggests, that it is a crime to "exploit the political process for personal gain” in this way? Or that it should be?
If there can be said to be an “establishment” response to the Perry indictment, it has been loudly expressed so far in his favor. This is understandable: a case about a veto, or the threat of a veto, built on a vaguely worded statute and poorly illuminated by a two-page, summary indictment, was bound to raise questions.
But Perry has not only been defended against the application of the Texas statute in question, but also more profoundly as a victim of the “criminalization of politics”. Even if the law could be construed to reach the alleged conduct, it is argued, it should not be. Whether the Governor was moving to oust an adversary from office or protecting contributors from an inquiry into state grants, the prosecutor is mistaking hardball politics for corrupt politics. It is one example among others, the critics say, and they point to the failed Edwards prosecution as another instance of the same irresponsible application of the criminal laws.
The “criminalization” of politics is self-evidently undesirable. Then again it is far from sure what the argument against it is meant to cover, that is, the nature of the “politics” that we should worry about criminalizing.
- You Should Talk to Your Kids—As long As You Are Not Engaged in Illegal Coordination
- Politicians: The Good , The Bad, and The Corrupt–and their Different “Constituencies”
- Political Spending and its Apparent Consequences
- Campaign Finance Reform and the GOP: An “About-Face”?
- Taking Issue with the Reform Establishment over Progressive Politics and Coordinated Issue Advertising: A Reply to Larry Noble
- More on the Mann-Corrado Brookings Paper: the Resistance to Campaign Finance Change as a Response to Polarization
- Understanding and Misunderstanding the Political Parties—and the Question of Whether They Understand Themselves
- The Coordination of Issue Advocacy Part II: Progressive Conflicts and a Hypothetical
- Not Really a Problem of Agency Discretion