"Teachers union revealed as funder behind pro-Walsh PAC" by Wesley Lowery | Globe Staff, December 28, 2013
The American Federation of Teachers confirmed Friday that it was the donor behind One Boston, a mysterious political action committee that paid for a $480,000 television commercial supporting Mayor-elect Martin J. Walsh during the final days of the Boston mayoral race.
The national teachers’ union exploited discrepancies in state-by-state campaign spending disclosure laws to anonymously fund nearly a half million dollars worth of advertising on behalf of Walsh.
No information was disclosed at the time about One Boston’s ideological loyalties or donors, enraging government watchdog groups who had already been critical of the unprecedented amount of outside money that was flowing into the race, which ultimately became the state’s most expensive municipal race ever.
*************************
Several members of the federation’s national leadership were outspoken in their support of Walsh and their dislike for his opponent, Councilor at Large John R. Connolly, who had several high-profile spats with the Boston Teachers Union in his six years on the council.
“The AFT is functionally the BTU,” Connolly said, reacting to the disclosure. “As a former candidate, I’m moving past the race. As a Boston public schools parent, I’m really angry that our teacher’s union would spend $500,000 on a mayor’s race and not attach their name to the contribution.”
Though it had vowed to remain uninvolved in the mayoral final, the Boston Teachers Union, which is formally affiliated with the AFT, endorsed Walsh on election day.
The Massachusetts database of campaign donations shows the AFT never gave money directly to Walsh’s campaign, which would have been subject to state-imposed contribution limits, or to One Boston, which would have been subject to disclosure requirements.
Instead, the national teacher’s union gave $480,000 to One New Jersey, a political action committee that has vocally opposed candidates who clash with teachers unions, most notably Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey.
In a complicated series of transactions, the AFT first gave the money to One New Jersey, which is not required under New Jersey campaign finance laws to disclose its donors. Then, One New Jersey gave the money to One Boston, a Massachusetts political action committee it set up for the purpose of funding an advertisement on behalf of Walsh. One Boston used the money for the pro-Walsh television commercial.
“We share the same values as Marty Walsh; that’s why we produced this positive, issues-oriented commercial,” said Joshua Henne, a spokesman for One New Jersey.
“Boston’s middle-class and working families are fortunate to have a mayor like Marty Walsh on their side,” Henne said.
The sudden appearance of One Boston-funded ads during the race’s final week without disclosure of the money’s origins outraged government watchdog groups and prompted calls from both candidates for the group to identity its donors.
************************
The only name listed in documents associated with the group is Jocelyn Hutt, 55, a woman from Roslindale who, city records show, had not voted in three of Boston’s past four municipal elections. It remains unclear what role Hutt played in setting up One Boston or if she is linked formally to One New Jersey.
One Boston was one of three outside groups that spent heavily on behalf of Walsh, whose mayoral victory was in part buoyed by independent expenditures from labor-affiliated groups.
Working America, the political arm of the AFL-CIO, put more than $665,000 into the race on behalf of Walsh. Another group, Virginia-based American Working Families, has disclosed that the more than $1.2 million it spent on Walsh’s behalf came from labor unions....
Related: Virginia PAC’s list is heavy with union donors
In total, $2.5 million was spent via independent expenditures on Walsh’s behalf, compared with $1.3 million spent on Connolly’s behalf, exclusively from national education reform groups.
--more--"
"Outside spending on mayoral finalists hit $3.8m" by Wesley Lowery | Globe Staff, December 17, 2013
Outside special interest groups spent $3.8 million on behalf of the two finalists in Boston’s mayoral election, pumping an unprecedented total of independent expenditures into a race that shattered local campaign spending records.
The groups spent twice as much on behalf of Mayor-elect Martin J. Walsh as they did on John R. Connolly.
Labor-affiliated political action committees lavished nearly $2.5 million on Walsh’s campaign, while local and national education groups spent roughly half that amount on Connolly’s bid, according to a report Tuesday by the state’s Office of Campaign and Political Finance.
The campaigns themselves spent a record-setting $5.6 million from their own accounts combined, shattering the campaign spending record set in 2009 when current Mayor Thomas M. Menino and challenger Michael Flaherty spent a combined $4 million, according to the report.
In all, a combined $9.4 million was spent by the two campaigns and by the outside groups on the candidates’ behalf. But it was the heavy involvement of outside independent expenditure groups, unleashed by a 2010 Supreme Court decision, that alarmed government watchdogs and political observers.
“The amount of outside spending in the Boston mayoral race was remarkable,” said Pamela Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause, a nonpartisan advocacy organization that has called for tighter controls on outside spending in elections. “It shattered the ceiling in terms of what we’ve seen before in a municipal race.”
Special interest groups such as labor unions and political action committees have two ways of spending money in elections. They can give limited donations directly to a campaign, and they can also make much larger “independent expenditures,” money spent on behalf of the candidate but not handled by the campaign. Independent expenditure groups are legally barred from coordinating with a candidate’s campaign.
Tuesday’s report sheds light on overall spending totals, but does not specify where the money spent by outside groups came from. State law allows their donors to remain confidential until January.
The state’s top campaign finance officials, news outlets, and the candidates themselves asked the groups to voluntarily release names before the election, but they declined.
Early in the general election campaign, Connolly said he and Walsh should swear off outside money, but gave up after Walsh refused and began allowing outside money to be spent on his behalf.
“We knew it was going to be a game-changer,” said the Rev. Miniard Culpepper,who campaigned for Connolly. “One million extra dollars [for Walsh] in a race won by four thousand votes — that says it all.”
Much of the outside spending came from Working America, the political arm of the AFL-CIO, which spent on behalf of Walsh, and Democrats for Education Reform, a Washington, D.C.-based group that spent on behalf of Connolly.
During the campaign, Walsh conceded that outside groups were spending heavily, but he stressed that campaign finance laws prohibited him from coordinating with those groups.
“The mayor-elect appreciates the support he received from over 6,000 volunteers and over 3,000 individual donors who supported his vision for Boston,” Kate Norton, Walsh’s spokeswoman, said in a statement to the Globe Tuesday night.
And they didn't even get invited to the party.
Steps toward equality
Not off to a very good start.
Gift limit for Martin Walsh inaugural too high, too many loopholes
Martin Walsh says Southie parade should be inclusive
They get an invite though!
Also see:
Martin Walsh’s inaugural committee announced
Walsh announces inauguration plans
Walsh’s inaugural celebration to feature music close to home
Walsh pushes inauguration ceremony to city’s edge
Walsh personnel announcements delayed
Walsh not ruling out lawsuit to block Revere casino
Walsh’s first mission: Develop new strategies to curb violence
Martin Walsh pushes service projects
He's already off on the wrong foot.
NEXT DAY UPDATE: Walsh’s education test
Pre$$ure is on to pass that one!
Walsh was the beneficiary of hundreds of thousands of dollars from groups whose funding sources and stated goals remain cloudy. One group, American Working Families of Alexandria, Va., spent more than $1 million on Walsh’s behalf during the course of the campaign.
The only name associated with the group is Bud Jackson, a Democratic consultant who repeatedly declined to disclose donors before the election.
In early November, a newly formed political committee called One Boston spent $480,000 on a television advertising buy on behalf of Walsh.
One Boston listed no specific political goals and the only name linked to the group’s paperwork is Jocelyn Hutt, a 55-year-old woman from Roslindale who city records show had not voted in three of Boston’s past four municipal elections.
The secretive nature of a significant chunk of the money spent by outside groups in the race has led several state lawmakers to join with good government groups to explore proposals to tighten disclosure rules.
“The groups are finding lots of ways of evading even the disclosure rules that do exist,” Wilmot said. “We need to tighten all of that up to give the public the most information possible before they’re at the ballot box.”
--more--"
Let's hope he doesn't piss off Partners like the state panel did.
