1 of 4

Yes

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 2

small donations going on in the campaign became such public knowledge, a sizable group of concerned citizens attempted donations using fictitious names and check-out counter gift cards to test the theories. If one has ever attempted to use one of these $25 or $50 gift cards to make an on-line purchase, one soon finds out it cant be done: banks demand not only a matching name and address but a three-digit verification code on each purchase. Since these cards don't provide these methods of validation, the cards are rejected out of hand. No bank will allow such transactions to occur because of the danger the card may be fictitious or the number stolen. Every one of these contributions went through, even with such obviously fictitious names as Mickey Mouse. It was glaringly obvious that the campaign had either reprogrammed software or turned off in some manner the validation mechanisms that prevent fraud. Since the major credit card companies would never willingly make good on such cards, one can only believe the monies represented by this huge pile of now-worthless cards had to have been replaced with cash from some other source-an excellent method of foreign money laundering.

It is known that groups overseas were holding fund-raisers and soliciting donations in the name of the campaign. If these foreign contributions are illegal, how are they then funneled into the campaign coffers? The only way to manage this without being caught red-handed is through the method described above.

One of the anomalies of our election funding laws is that only candidates accepting public funding face a complete audit. Those candidates not accepting public funds therefore never have to face a level playing field. In this way, candidates can become the bearer of enormous foreign influence via foreign contributions leading them to be elected. This is generally seen as being prevented by the disclosure laws regarding FEC disclosure for donations over $200. However, when a candidate receives huge amounts of on-line donations via the system just described, that safeguard is bypassed. There is nothing to guarantee that any of the $200 million came from valid citizen voters. One can only question how much public support did the candidate actually receive? And whose "mandate" does he intend to follow?

As long as there are campaign donations, there will be fraud. Someone somewhere will devise a method of sneaking illegal money into someone's campaign war chest. But now that the ways the individual under-$200 contribution regulations can be abused have come to light, it is vital we close the loophole. And sadly, that will mean having everyone's contributions identified and audited.

Learn more about this author, Linda Sunkle-Pierucki.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

Add your voice

Know something about Should federal political candidates have to reveal the names of all their donors, not just those who give them more than $200??
We want to hear your view. Write now!