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

Barclays Center/Levy Restaurants hit with suit charging discrimination on disability, race; supervisors said to use vicious slurs, pursue retaliation

The Daily News has an article today, Barclays Center hit with $5M suit claiming discrimination against disabled, while the New York Post headlined its article Barclays Center sued over taunting disabled employees.

While that's part of the lawsuit, more prominent are claims of racial discrimination and retaliation, with black employees claiming repeated abuse by white supervisors, preferential treatment toward Hispanic colleagues, and retaliation in response to complaints.

Two individual supervisors, for example, are charged with  referring to black employees as “black motherfucker,” “dumb black bitch,” “black monkey,” “piece of shit” and “nigger.”

Two have referred to an employee blind in one eye as “cyclops,” and “the one-eyed guy,” and an employee with a nose disorder as “the nose guy.”

There's been no official response yet though arena spokesman Barry Baum told the Daily News they, but take “allegations of this kind very seriously” and have "a zero tolerance policy for…

Behind the "empty railyards": 40 years of ATURA, Baruch's plan, and the city's diffidence

To supporters of Forest City Ratner's Atlantic Yards project, it's a long-awaited plan for long-overlooked land. "The Atlantic Yards area has been available for any developer in America for over 100 years,” declared Borough President Marty Markowitz at a 5/26/05 City Council hearing.

Charles Gargano, chairman of the Empire State Development Corporation, mused on 11/15/05 to WNYC's Brian Lehrer, “Isn’t it interesting that these railyards have sat for decades and decades and decades, and no one has done a thing about them.” Forest City Ratner spokesman Joe DePlasco, in a 12/19/04 New York Times article ("In a War of Words, One Has the Power to Wound") described the railyards as "an empty scar dividing the community."

But why exactly has the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Vanderbilt Yard never been developed? Do public officials have some responsibility?

At a hearing yesterday of the Brooklyn Borough Board Atlantic Yards Committee, Kate Suisma…

No, security guards can't ban photos. Questions remain about visibility of ID/sticker system.

The bi-monthly Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park Community Update meeting June 14, held at 55 Hanson Place, addressed multiple issues, including delays in the project, a new detente with project neighbors,concerns about traffic congestion, upcoming sewer work and demolitions, and an explanation of how high winds caused debris to fly off the under-construction 38 Sixth Avenue building. I'll have more coverage.
Security issues came up several times at the meeting.
Wayne Bailey, a resident who regularly takes photos and videos (that I often use) of construction/operations issues that impact residents, asked representatives of Tishman Construction if the security guard at the sites they're building works for them.
After Tishman Senior VP Eric Reid said yes, Bailey asked why a guard told him not to shoot video of the site, even though he was on a public street.

"I will address it with principals for that security firm," Reid said.
Forest City Ratner executive Ashley Cotton, the …

Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park graphic: what's built/what might be coming (post-dated pinned post)

This graphic, posted in November 2017, is post-dated to stay at the top of the blog. It will be updated as announced configurations change and buildings launch. Note the unbuilt B1 and the proposed shift in bulk to the unbuilt Site 5.

The August 2014 tentative configurations proposed by developer Greenland Forest City Partners will change. The project is already well behind that tentative timetable.

The previous graphic, from August 2017 (without the ghost B1)

Barclays Center event June 11 to protest plans to expand Israeli draft; questions about logistics

At right is a photo of a poster spotted in Hasidic Williamsburg right. Clearly there's an event scheduled at the Barclays Center aimed at the Haredi Jewish community (strict Orthodox Jews who reject secular culture), but the lack of English text makes it cryptic.

The website explains, Protest Against Israeli Draft of Bnei Yeshiva Rescheduled for Barclays Center:
A large asifa to protest the drafting of bnei yeshiva in Eretz Yisroel into the Israeli army that had been set to take place this month will instead be held on Sunday, 17 Sivan/June 11, at the Barclays Center in Downtown Brooklyn, NY. So attendees at a big gathering will protest an apparent change of policy that will make it much more difficult for traditional Orthodox Jewish students--both Hasidic (who follow a rebbe) and non-Hasidic (who don't)--to get deferments from the draft. Comments on the Yeshiva World website explain some of the debate.

The logistical questions

What's unclear is how large the ev…

Atlanta's Atlantic Yards moves ahead

First mentioned in April, the Atlantic Yards project in Atlanta is moving ahead--and has the potential to nudge Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn further down in Google searches.

According to a 5/30/17 press release, Hines and Invesco Real Estate Announce T3 West Midtown and Atlantic Yards:
Hines, the international real estate firm, and Invesco Real Estate, a global real estate investment manager, today announced a joint venture on behalf of one of Invesco Real Estate’s institutional clients to develop two progressive office projects in Atlanta totalling 700,000 square feet. T3 West Midtown will be a 200,000-square-foot heavy timber office development and Atlantic Yards will consist of 500,000 square feet of progressive office space in two buildings. Both projects are located on sites within Atlantic Station in the flourishing Midtown submarket.
Hines will work with Hartshorne Plunkard Architecture (HPA) as the design architect for both T3 West Midtown and Atlantic Yards. DLR Group will be t…

Not quite the pattern: Greenland selling development sites, not completed condos

Real Estate Weekly, reporting on trends in Chinese investment in New York City, on 11/18/15 quoted Jim Costello, a senior vice president at research firm Real Capital Analytics:
“They’re typically building high-end condos, build it and sell it. Capital return is in a few years. That’s something that is ingrained in the companies that have been coming here because that’s how they’ve grown in the last 35 years. It’s always been a development game for them. So they’re just repeating their business model here,” he said. When I read that last November, I didn't think it necessarily applied to Atlantic Yards/Pacific Park, now 70% owned (outside of the Barclays Center and B2 modular apartment tower), by the Greenland Group, owned significantly by the Shanghai government.
A majority of the buildings will be rentals, some 100% market, some 100% affordable, and several--the last several built--are supposed to be 50% market/50% subsidized. (See tentative timetable below.)

Selling development …