JACKSON — With Mississippi voters struggling with $4-per-gallon gas, higher food prices and with some families worried about loved ones serving their country on the front lines in Iraq and Afghanistan, two Mississippi U.S. Senate candidates are trading body blows over alleged campaign finance violations.
Succinctly, both Republican interim U.S. Sen. Roger Wicker and Democratic former Gov. Ronnie Musgrove have each accused their opponent of campaign finance violations — specifically of Federal Election Commission violations.
On July 16, the campaigns began exchanging the campaign finance allegations. First, the Wicker campaign accused the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee’s (DSCC) of running illegal ads in support of Musgrove. The Wicker camp said that federal election law stipulates that “coordination” between a federal campaign and a national committee, such as the DSCC, is limited to $180,800 in Mississippi.
The Wicker camp claims the DSCC has spent more than $500,000 on Musgrove’s behalf, more than $350,000 over the federal limit. To back up that claim, high-powered attorney Ben Ginsberg of 2000 Florida presidential recount fame has been retained by the Wicker campaign to file a formal FEC complaint against the DSCC and Musgrove.
In a telephone press conference on Tuesday, Ginsberg said: “The Wicker campaign has a five-to-one cash on hand advantage because the Musgrove campaign hasn’t done very well raising funds. So the DSCC decided to skirt the law, and Ronnie Musgrove decided to skirt the law.”
Ginsberg said the DSCC was using a similar tactic in an Oregon race, but admitted that the Democrats may be exploiting “a new loophole” by which they can “put more money than the law allows in the Musgrove campaign.”
The Wicker camp’s FEC complaint filing comes about a week after the Musgrove campaign filed an FEC complaint against Wicker in which the Musgrove campaign alleged that Wicker accepted illegal campaign contributions. Musgrove alleged that Wicker accepted contributions from individual donors and political action committees in excess of the limit set by federal law by engaging in so-called “double dipping” from two 2008 campaign accounts to fund his race for Senate.
Spokesmen for both campaigns told the press that their respective candidates were in compliance with all FEC regulations and that their opponents were each guilty of grievous violations of the nation’s campaign finance regulations.
Who’s telling the truth? Who’s not? When will the FEC rule on these complaints?
Ginsberg said that in his experience it “takes three weeks for the FEC to eat lunch” and that he doubts that the agency will rule on either complaint before the election is over.
For the record, it appears that Wicker’s allegations against the DSCC and Musgrove have far more merit. But given Ginsberg’s likely accurate assessment of the speed with which the FEC will take up the complaints, it’s likely a moot point.
The Senate campaign between Wicker and Musgrove is so close at this point that neither camp can really afford to waste time and resources on a “did not, did too” campaign finance argument.
Mississippi voters have more pressing concerns — pocketbook issues — that take precedence over FEC complaints.
Gas and food prices, a stagnant economy, war fatigue and foreign policy are just a few of the things that voters are concerned about right now.
Voters are interested in hearing the candidates talk about those issues. Unfortunately, we live in a society in which allegations of politicians from either party skirting campaign finance laws is not at all shocking and are unlikely to move the needle much in either direction. Voters want more.
