Brennan Center: “H.R.1 specifies that no taxpayer money will be used…”
Politifact: “SC Rep. Cunningham did not vote for $5M in tax funds to go to campaign coffers”
With less than two weeks until Election Day, Nancy Mace’s desperation is starting to set in. In a new ad, Mace continues to resort to lies about Cunningham’s efforts to end the corrupting influence of Big Money in politics – lies that have been repeatedly debunked.
Lie:
Mace falsely claimed that Rep. Cunningham voted for a bill to give millions of taxpayer dollars to his own campaign.
Fact:
Rep. Cunningham supported a bill that is the toughest, most sweeping anti-corruption bill passed by Congress in more than 50 years – a bill that cracks down on corruption in both parties.
That bill, H.R.1, specifically states that no taxpayer money will be used – a provision that was put in place because of Rep. Cunningham’s leadership.
What’s more, in order to take on the corrupt system where elected officials are responsive to their Big Money donors instead of their constituents, matched funds for campaigns would come from fines on corporate bad actors.
Here are the facts, as previously reported on by news sources and institutions:
- “SC Rep. Cunningham did not vote for $5M in tax funds to go to campaign coffers” [Politifact]
- “H.R.1 specifies that no taxpayer money will be used…” [Brennan Center]
- “The money for the matching donations would come from a 2.75 percent fee assessed on civil and criminal financial penalties with the government, which then would be earmarked for a ‘Freedom From Influence Fund.’” [Washington Post]
- “Second, as the bill is currently structured, the program would get money from a 2.75 percent fee on people and corporations that commit malfeasance — not from a broad pool of tax dollars… So we rate it Mostly False.” [NC Politifact]
- “But it was later amended to use money collected from a 2.75% fee assessed on civil and criminal financial penalties paid by companies and corporate officers convicted of federal wrongdoing. The bill says no other funding sources can be used if those fees are not enough to pay for the program, and that the matching rate would be reduced instead of using other dollars.” [The Morning Call]
- No appropriated funds shall be used for the Freedom From Influence Fund. In the event the balance of the Fund is found to be insufficient to cover the projected costs of the matching funds, the FEC will reduce the match rate to ensure the fund can meet projected match payments. [Democracy Reform Task Force]
- “The bill would provide no source of funds for the Freedom From Influence Fund; without funding, those programs would not be implemented and thus those provisions would have no cost.” [Congressional Budget Office]
###