Skip to main content

Housekeeping! How "soft money" political slush funds rule state politics; Common Cause calls it "legal bribery"

Forest City Ratner's contributions in 2008 to the Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee's Housekeeping account and last year to the New York State Democratic Committee are just the tip of the iceberg, with many, many donors giving such unrestricted "soft money" contributions.

Though state law says party housekeeping accounts are supposed to be reserved for party-building administrative expenses but not to promote specific candidates, Common Cause/NY has shown that housekeeping expenditures somehow spike each election season for spending on political consultants and campaign-related advertising.

"There are no contribution limits on housekeeping accounts, nor does the Board of Elections conduct any meaningful auditing or enforcement of how soft money funds are spent, making them an ideal outlet for New York's most powerful and entrenched special interests to influence New York State government," said Common Cause last August.

In 13 years, special interests have given $133.8 million to housekeeping accounts in return for influence and access to lawmakers, Common Cause/NY stated 5/21/13 in the press release, Common Cause/NY Unveils Explosive Analysis of Housekeeping Accounts, "The Life of the Party 2013"

State law limits individuals to giving no more than $150,000 in the aggregate in any single year, and no corporation $5,000 in a single year. Party committees may accept no more than $102,300 from an individual and $5,000 from a corporation.

The loophole? Housekeeping accounts allow unlimited sums, "soft money".

"Housekeeping accounts are a notorious loophole which both contributors and committees exploit to ignore our state's campaign contribution limits and undermine the voters," said Susan Lerner, Executive Director of Common Cause/NY. "The system of legal bribery in which Albany operates is largely responsible for the wide scale corruption we've seen in recent months."

Common Cause calls for campaign finance reform, based on a system of small dollar matching funds. While that system, as in New York City, can be open to exploitation, there's far less opportunity for big donors to run the show.

Donations grow

From 1999-2005, donors gave a total of $46.7 million to the soft money committees of the state parties and the state legislature, according to the report.

From 2006-2012, contributions to the state parties and state legislature increased by 24% to $58 million. But that total, including local/county contributions, reached $87.1 million for the second seven year period alone. (The state did not begin tracking local/county contributions until 2006.)

Businesses made $45.4 million (52%) of all soft money contributions from 2006-2012, while individuals gave $23.3 million (27%). Political committees gave $9.4 million (11%) while labor unions contributed $7.7 million (9%).

The top 20 donors, as shown in the graphic above right: Mayor Michael Bloomberg ($7.2 m), New York State United Teachers ($3.2m), the Greater New York Hospital Association ($3.0m), 1199/SEIU Healthcare Workers East ($2.0m), Cablevision ($1.6m), Verizon ($1.5m), the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America ($1.4m), Time Warner Cable ($1.2m), Philip Morris ($1.2m) , the Healthcare Association of New York ($1.1m), Robert Mercer ($1.0m), the Rent Stabilization Association ($941k), Wal-Mart ($929k), the estate of Henry Sanders ($813k), the Red Apple Group and John Catsimatidis ($780k), Coca-Cola ($664k), the Law PAC of New York ($651k), AT&T ($624k), and Diageo Guinness ($566k).

Recipients: state party committees top the list

From 2006-2012, the State Legislature party committees were the top recipients of soft money contributions, accounting for a total of $33.8 million (39%).

County parties across the state raised a total of $25.7 million (30%), state parties raised $24.1 million (28%), and local level parties raised $1.9 million (2%).

The top ten committees took in $64.3 million (74%).

They include, as shown in the graphic at right: the NYS Senate Republican Campaign Committee ($19.9m), the NYS Democratic Committee ($7.0m), the NYS Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee ($7.0m), the Conservative Party NYS ($5.7m), the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee ($5.3m), the New York Republican State Committee ($4.9m), the Independence Party of NYS ($4.5m), the Monroe County Republican Committee ($4.4m), the Queens County Democratic Party ($3.5m), and the Kings County Democratic Party Committee ($2.1m).

Both the Independence Party and the Working Families Party--which raised $2.0 million from 2006-2012--showed significant growth.

Biggest expenditure: "Other"

Where does the money go? It's a mystery.

"Without clear guidelines and consistent auditing, it is impossible to rely on accurate self-reporting of expenditures by the parties," Common Cause said, noting that the largest single category of soft money expenses is "Other" ($37.3 million).

In fact, nearly $3.8 million in expenses have no purpose code or a purpose code not identified by the BOE--which means the recipients are simply misleading the agency.

Less than 0.2% of expenses were itemized as "Voter Registration Materials or Services"--purportedly the type of expenditure used to defend soft money.

Housekeeping expenditures typically peak in the months prior to an election, which suggests much of the spending is campaign related.

The need for limits

Common Cause states:
With no limits to the size of donations or enforcement of "non-campaign" spending, soft money accounts have become an integral part of Albany's "show me the money" culture and an important contributor to the power of wealthy special interests at both the state and local levels of New York State government.
If Albany is serious about reform, it must rein in the parties' housekeeping accounts and empower small donors through enacting a Fair Elections system of public matching funds.
And it got worse

On 6/16/13, Common Cause/NY revealed that the $5.9 million in soft money raised by the New York State Democratic Committee (NYSDC) so far in 2013 was already the largest amount ever raised by a soft money committee in a single year in New York State and more than the total raised in the previous five years.

"As widely reported in the press, the NYSDC's record-breaking soft money fundraising in 2013 is the result of Governor Cuomo's decision to use it as the fundraising vehicle for an advertising campaign promoting his policy agenda," Common Cause stated.

And while Common Cause recognized "the improved transparency" in using the party committee rather than Cuomo's ad hoc Committee to Save New York--it expressed concern "about the influence afforded to wealthy special interests by the soft money loophole and the ability of donors to contributed unlimited sums to New York's political parties."

The majority of the funds raised in 2013 ($4.1 million out of $5.9 million) came from 46 new donors which were said to not contribute at all during the five year period from 2008-2012.

(One contribution, of $25,000, came from Forest City Ratner, which knew it was involved in another round of state approval for Atlantic Yards. Also, Forest City did contribute in January 2008.)

Graphing the increases

Note how real estate is nearly the top category.

Leading donors of soft money

Last August, Common Cause updated its findings, noting that, since 2006, parties have taken in nearly $98 million in soft money contributions, more than half of it from just 59 donors. Forest City didn't make that cut. It's one of many, many companies and organizations trying to wield influence. 

Leading recipients of soft money

More than 90% of the money went to 20 recipients, starting with the state Republicans and Democrats, though not the Republicans in the Assembly.


  1. Anonymous7:26 AM

    Always astounding the time and work you put into this important research. One thing the charts do not enlarge when clicked and I can't see much of them, maybe just me.

  2. Thanks. Some of the graphics when clicked are more legible, some not. But they should still be discernible. Or links back to original Common Cause documents should help.


Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

At 550 Vanderbilt, big chunk of apartments pitched to Chinese buyers as "international units"

One key to sales at the 550 Vanderbilt condo is the connection to China, thanks to Shanghai-based developer Greenland Holdings.

It's the parent of Greenland USA, which as part of Greenland Forest City Partners owns 70% of Pacific Park (except 461 Dean and the arena).

And sales in China may help explain how the developer was able to claim early momentum.
"Since 550 Vanderbilt launched pre-sales in June [2015], more than 80 residences have gone into contract, representing over 30% of the building’s 278 total residences," the developer said in a 9/25/15 press release announcing the opening of a sales gallery in Brooklyn. "The strong response from the marketplace indicates the high level of demand for well-designed new luxury homes in Brooklyn..."

Maybe. Or maybe it just meant a decent initial pipeline to Chinese buyers.

As lawyer Jay Neveloff, who represents Forest City, told the Real Deal in 2015, a project involving a Chinese firm "creates a huge market for…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…