Edwards’ Campaign Quietly Refunds Contributions to Bundlers, Big Backers
UPDATE at 1645 at end of story.
The Edwards ‘08 Campaign for President has quietly refunded almost $4 million to individual contributors, a number of them, bundlers and big backers. This should be news to Warren Buffet who recently mused that Edwards’ supporters should get together and file a class action suit. It seems another “class” has already had their contributions refunded–and it’s not the “grassroots” little guys.
We had no idea the campaign was handing out refunds until we happened to come across the information while perusing the site OpenSecrets.org and the data supplied to the Federal Election Commission by the Edwards’ campaign.
We were baffled, how did the Edwards’ campaign manage to refund that much money, almost $4 million, and no one notice? We hadn’t seen any mention of the refunds elsewhere, not on the web, not in the MSM, and not on the Edwards’ campaign website.
We found it interesting, at a time when Warren Buffet on CNBC This Morning (courtesy Mickey Kaus at Slate) mused whether Edwards’ contributors should file a class-action suit to get their money back, there’s a whole other “class” of individuals who’ve received their refund. And what an interesting “class” we found:
Out of 667 “bundlers” or designated fundraisers, 276 or 40%, had received a refund of their individual contributions. Not only did the individual bundlers get their money back but in some cases so did their family members.
Other refundees included Fred Baron, Edwards’ former national finance campaign chairman in both the ‘04 and ‘08 elections. Baron recently admitted that he had been monetarily “helping” Edwards’ ex-mistress, Rielle Hunter. The list includes some of Edwards’ largest bundlers, Thomas Girardi, John O’Quinn, and William Lerash, as well as other “famous” refundees: Michael Eisner, Don Henley, Eric Montross, and Michigan Congressman (D) David Bonoir of Michigan.
[NOTE: The trial lawyers listed here are called "bottom feeders" by Sen. Joe Biden, no less. From Overlawyered, Sen. Biden and the trial lawyers:
In 2005, Sen. Biden praised “bottom-feeders” (his term) in the legal profession, saying it was worth it to let them collect big fees “to stop bad guys from doing bad things”.
]
We took a look at the Edwards campaign website to see if there was any info listed on how to get a refund and came up empty-handed.
We’ve included a list of Edward’s bundlers who have received a refund as well the “moneybags” behind Edwards who got their money back too:
According to Insider Exclusive, Thomas Girardi was named the “The Billion Dollar Gentleman” by the L.A. Daily Journal for $1 billion in verdicts and settlements over a two-year period.
According to Opensecrets.org, Girardi’s firm, Girardi and Keese donated $43,000 to Edwards’ campaign. Thomas Girardi, the founder of the firm, received his Edwards’ refund check as well as members of his family.
Girardi, Denise Rancho Palos Verde, CA $2,300 March 24, 2008
Girardi, Erika Pasadena, CA $2,300 March 24, 2008
Girardi, John Rancho Palos Verde, CA $2,300 March 24, 2008
Girardi, John Rancho Palos Verde, CA $2,300 June 02, 2008
Girardi, John Rancho Palos Verde, CA $2,300 June 06, 2008
Girardi, Patrick Manhattan Beach, CA $2,300 March 25, 2008
Girardi, Thomas Pasadena, CA $2,300 March 24, 2008
John O’Quinn, Texas trial lawyer and king of Tobacco and Silicon Breast Implant Civil Lawsuits, whose net worth is in the multi-millions, requested and received his $2300 refund from the Edwards’ campaign.
O’Quinn held an Edwards “grassroots” fundraiser in Austin, Texas, in June of 2007, for the “little” people who could give only “$15″ to Edward’s campaign. The fundraiser was called “Small Change for Big Change”.
O’Quinn, John Houston, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
Fred Baron, the multi-millionaire trial attorney who was Edwards’ National Campaign Finance Chairman in both the ‘04 and ‘08 races and who purportedly has paid thousands to Edwards’ ex-mistress, Rielle Hunter, made sure he got his campaign contribution back as well as other members of his family.
Baron, Frederick Dallas, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
Baron, Joan Dallas, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
Baron, Lisa Dallas, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
Baron, Steven Dallas, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
Baron, Steven Dallas, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
Baron, Steven Dallas, TX $2,300 March 25, 2008
Russell Budd is the other half of the Texas law firm, Baron & Budd. Fred Baron parted ways with Baron & Budd several years ago. Baron and Budd made an estimated $800 million in asbestos-related lawsuits.
Budd, Dorothy Dallas, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
Budd, Russell Dallas, TX $2,300 March 24, 2008
William Lerach was one of Edwards’ top bundlers. Lerach, plus members of his family and his law firm, Lerach Coughlin, raised almost $76,000 in the first half of 2007, got his money back on March 24, even though he was sentenced to serve two years in prison on February 11, 2008. Lerach entered a plea deal after being charged with a kickback scheme that purportedly netted his old firm, Milberg Weiss, $200 million.
According to the Washington Post, in an article dated 9/19/2007, the Edwards’ campaign “donated” Lerach’s personal donation to charity.
“Edwards campaign said it donated Lerach’s personal donations to charity yesterday after his guilty plea, but isn’t returning the money he raised from others.”
–Washington Post
Yet we found at Opensecrets.org where the campaign had refunded the $2300 to Lerach:
Lerach, William La Jolla, CA $2,300 March 24, 2008
From the Wall Street Journal dated 2/11/2008:
“Famed plaintiffs lawyer Bill Lerach received a two-year sentence today for his role in the alleged kickback scheme at Milberg Weiss. Lerach, 61, was also sentenced to two years probation, fined $250,000 and ordered to complete 1,000 hours of community service. “This whole conspiracy corrupted the law firm and it corrupted it in the most evil way,” U.S. District Judge John Walter said during the hearing.”
[Background information: access over 100 DBKP stories on the John Edwards-Rielle Hunter affair, scandal and cover-up: John Edwards Love Child Scandal Library.]
The Bundlers
For those who are unaware of what a “bundler” is here’s the definition from the site, White House For Sale:
“Bundling describes the activity of fundraisers who pool a large number of campaign contributions from political action committees (PACs) and individuals. Bundlers, who are often corporate CEOs, lobbyists, hedge fund managers or independently wealthy people, are able to funnel far more money to campaigns than they could personally give under campaign finance laws.”
Bundlers are persons who make either an oral or written agreement with a campaign to be designated as fundraiser. The campaign is required by the Federal Election Committee, or FEC, to disclose this info as part of the campaign filings with the FEC.
While it seems over 40% of Edwards’ bundlers have gotten their refunds we’re not sure if the people whom they collected contributions for Edwards have received theirs, or even if they are aware of the fact that they can. (We’re assuming that since the bundlers got their contributions refunded, so can everyone else. We failed to find any info on the Edwards for President 08 site on “refunds” for contributions)
We’ve put together a list of persons identified by White House For Sale as Edwards campaign bundlers, then cross-referenced the names with the information on the site, Opensecrets.Org., to report which bundlers, as well as their family members, that received refunds from the John Edwards for President 2008 Campaign.
Along with the name of the bundler who received a refund are the names of family members who also received refunds. We’ve also included the amount refunded and the date of the refund listed by the Edwards campaign. Federal campaign law allows persons to contribute to both the primary and the general election which may reflect some individuals receiving more than one refund.
The FEC allows individuals to contribute up to $2300 per election. For a look at the Edwards’ campaign bundlers who received refunds here’s the link.
So far the total amount refunded to contributors is listed at $3,831,398. We decided to check and see if the little “grassroots” contributors had gotten their refunds too:
We looked at contributions totaling 100.00 or less.
We left out contributors who had received a refund of a 100.00 or less if they also received other refunds which brought the total amount received from the campaign over 100.00.
We found 125 refunds that met this criteria, the total amount: $6582.00. The percentage of refunds returned to the “grass roots” contributors, those who received a refund of a 100.00 or less was 1/5th of a percent of the total amount refunded. That’s right, the total was a mere 1/5th of a percent of the total amount refunded to contributors from the Edwards campaign.
We also took a look at some of those “little” grassroots contributors and found some interesting info:
One “little guy” who contributed $4 and got it back was an attorney from Indiana. A Hollywood editor had his $35 sent back as well as $15 from a Clinton campaign staffer. The Deputy Director of Government Affairs in Puerto Rico had his $30 returned as well as actor Peter Coyote, all $55.
Forty bucks was refunded to the head of a college while $65 was returned to Texas attorney, William Ikard, who was named by Texas Law and Politics 2005’s Super Lawyer of the Year for the practice area of tax litigation.
Connecticut State Senator Gary Lebeau (D) was probably relieved when he got his $100 refund check. Lobbyist Mary Littleton of Nashville got her $30 bucks back. She’ll need it as she was recently fired from the Tennessee Association for Justice after she was caught having an affair with State Representative Bob Briley.
We found several other trial attorneys who had their $100 or less contributions returned but the winner of the cheapest lawyer contribution goes to Dusty Elias Kirk of Pepper Hamilton LLC, in Pittsburgh, PA. Kirk got her $1 donation refund from the Edwards campaign.
We didn’t realize contributions came with a money-back guarantee. We assumed a contribution was given in the spirit of the campaign, to help the candidate “run” for office and to help defray the cost of the campaign. The vast majority of these refunds occurred months before Edwards publicly admitted he’d had an affair. The bulk of the refunds were issued seven weeks after Edwards announced he was no longer running for President and seven weeks prior to Edwards endorsing Obama. We can only assume these individuals felt their “contribution” had a “money-back” guarantee–since Edwards failed to “win” they were entitled to a refund.
UPDATE:
We just found an article where according to the Raleigh Telegram, the reason why Eric Montross had his contribution refunded:
“Last year, on June 30th, both Montross and his wife donated the new maximum amount of $2,300 apiece for a total of $4,600. Another amount of $2,300 was donated for Edwards’ presidential run if he had won the Democratic nomination, but all donations made for that particular segment of the campaign were refunded when Edwards’ dropped out of the race.”
If we read this quote correctly it seems Montross’ contribution was contingent upon Edwards’ winning the nomination. There you have it, a contribution based on results, a money-back guarantee.
As for the little “grassroots” contributors, the percentage of those who received refunds is laughable, less than 1/5th of a percent. Some of the “little” people who gave a $100 or less were professionals: attorneys, physicians, and lobbyists, a far cry from those who could only afford to give “$15″ at the Texas fundraiser given for Edwards last year by attorney John O’Quinn. Out of the 125 refunds given to people for $100 or less, only three were under $15, two of those were contributions from attorneys.
On the bright side, it seems the Edwards campaign can and does give refunds of contributions. If Edwards’ bundlers, their families, and the big backers behind Edwards can get their money back, then so should anyone else who contributed to Edwards’ campaign.
Also at DBKP, another look at the Edwards’ campaign questionable refunds: John Edwards’ Scandal: Many Big Edwards Donors Got Refunds in March
UPDATE:
We contacted the Center for Responsive Politics, who maintains the Open Secrets website for some guidance on this matter. We received back an email from CRP Communications Director, Massie Ritsch.
“I’ll have our Research Dept. look into this, but my guess is that this was money that had been earmarked for the general election. Nothing more sinister than that. Since it was clear by March that Edwards wasn’t going to be the nominee, his campaign probably returned that money because they couldn’t legally spend it. These were probably refunds the campaign originated without any request from the donor. Any general election funds have to be returned by candidates who don’t make it to that round.”
UPDATE at 1645 EDT:
Nowhere in our stories did we claim that the Edwards campaign was doing anything illegal.
After speaking with the Federal Elections Commission, we have actually have a few more questions for the Edwards’ campaign.
Those questions will be in the form of a new post shortly.
By LBG
Source – White House For Sale
Source – Opensecrets.org
Image – Fat Cats
↑ Grab this Headline Animator for your webpage OR
Click the banner to grab DBKP's News Feed for Yourself!
Comments
Trackbacks
- John Edwards Scandal: Many Big Edwards Donors Got Refunds in March | DBKP - The Worldwide Leader in Weird
- Edwards ‘08 For President Bundlers Who Received Refunds | DBKP - The Worldwide Leader in Weird
- » John Edwards Scandal: Many Big Edwards Backers Got March Campaign Refunds - Blogger News Network
- John Edwards: Many Big Edwards Backers Got March Refunds from Campaign « DBKP at WordPress
- Interesting News: Edwards campaign giving refunds, but not to small donors. – Political Byline
- No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » The Morning Scramble, Part 2 - 8/25/2008
- Edwards scandal updates
- Political Party Poop
- John Edwards Campaign Refunds: More Questions than Answers | DBKP - The Worldwide Leader in Weird
- » Blog Archive » Defend-America.com | where you defend your “America” as you see it and love it… Politics/Religion/Philosophy
- 28 Dem National Convention Pix: Anti-War March, Patriots Corner and Moonbats | DBKP - The Worldwide Leader in Weird
- Warning: These Campaigns Will Self-Destruct
- F3 Coalition - [Faith. Family. Freedom.] » Blog Archive » These Campaigns Will Self-Destruct
- » John Edwards: Campaign Refunded Fat Cats; Shafted “Shallow Pockets” Contributors - Blogger News Network





TELL DBKP! SEND US A TIP!





It’s quite possible that all of those donations were made for the general election campaign rather than the primary election campaign. I don’t know if the FEC records show that distinction, and I don’t have time right now to look it up. However, contributors can max out at $2300 for the primary, and then max out for another $2300 for the general. But if the candidate loses the primary he’ll have to return the general election contributions. If that’s all that’s happening here, it’s a non-story. His contributors knew they’d probably get their general election contributions back, but they effectively loaned the money to Edwards’ campaign for a brief time just to inflate his campaign finance reports for publicity purposes.
Reply
dpwiener
Thanks for your comment.
Several of the bundlers received refunds in excess of 2300, so we’re assuming that the refunds were for contributions from both the primary and the general election.
” His contributors knew they’d probably get their general election contributions back, but they effectively loaned the money to Edwards’ campaign for a brief time just to inflate his campaign finance reports for publicity purposes.”
This is most likely true too, and we wonder, do the rest of the public know about this, how one can “contribute” or “earmark” their “contributions” to be returned if their candidate fails to win?
We believe the “little people” who supported Edwards are unaware of this little “facet” of campaign contributions. There are quite few people who are very angry and have commented they want their Edwards’ contributions back. It’s these people who seem to be unaware of the process of earmarking, as we were.
These “little” people, whom Edwards aimed his campaign were unable to afford to contribute the 2300. that so many of these donors (bundlers) “gave” to Edwards which are now back in their pockets. To the bundlers, 2300. is chump change.
Reply
I just took a quick peek at the list of refunds at OpenSecrets.org, and it looks like most of the amounts are for the maximum of $2300 (or in a few cases $4600, which is allowable if it can be attributed to a combined contribution from a husband and wife). Also, these all took place long, long before the latest “love child” revelations, so there would have been no incentive to make the refunds except the obvious one: They were for contributions earmarked for the general election and legally had to be returned.
There’s nothing particularly sinister or secretive about such a ploy. Hillary did the same thing last year, when the press was using the quarterly campaign contribution totals as a proxy for the race between her and Obama. The press dutifully reported that a lot of Hillary’s contributions were from maxed-out contributors and hence were only useable for the general election. Pundits then discounted those contributions when comparing her receipts to Obama’s receipts. Nevertheless, a lot of newspaper headlines conflated them, so they were still very valuable from a PR viewpoint.
I don’t see why it should matter to smaller contributors. If they gave less than $2300, then all of it would go towards Edwards’ primary campaign, which is what they wanted at the time. How were they hurt? Richer people who maxed out and then gave additional amounts for the general election either were delusional (thinking Edwards would actually win the nomination) or else knew they’d be getting it back after he was defeated in the primaries. How were they better off versus not making the contribution in the first place?
This would have been a real scoop if big contributors were getting refunds but little contributors weren’t after Edwards confessed to his affair. The true explanation appears to be pretty mundane.
Reply
I donated what I consider to be a significant sum of money to John Edwards, but I am not an lawyer.
Is there a website address where I can apply for a refund?
Is there a deadline for applying for refunds?
I would appreciate any help anyone can give me.
Reply
Check out this fake John Edwards blog. Pretty funny.
http://www.newsgroper.com/john-edwards
Reply
DP Wiener:
DP you made some great points.
This is the issue I take umbrage too:
“I don’t see why it should matter to smaller contributors. If they gave less than $2300, then all of it would go towards Edwards’ primary campaign, which is what they wanted at the time. How were they hurt?”
You assume you know what the smaller contributors want.
The smaller donors are upset that their candidate, Edwards, mislead them while taking their money. While his bundlers and high end donors received refunds due to a different reason, they still got their money back while the little guys are left to sit and stew.
They see it as unfair and so do we.
Reply
At last, John Edwards proved to voters that there really are two Americas.
And the only one’s he’s giving refunds to are the ones who reap the rewards and think they can buy the Congress or Presidency.
Wee bit hypocritical, methinks.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D03EED91139F930A15752C0A9629C8B63
”One America that does the work, another America that reaps the reward. One America that pays the taxes, another America that gets the tax breaks. . . . One America — middle-class America — whose needs Washington has long forgotten. Another America — narrow-interest America — whose every wish is Washington’s command. One America that is struggling to get by, another America that can buy anything it wants, even a Congress and a President.”
Reply
Let me just briefly clarify: I think that Edwards’ contributors, both large and small, have an excellent moral argument that they were lied to and defrauded by him. Whether they have a legal argument is more doubtful, since politicians lie all the time; hence contributors should generally be ruled by the principle of “caveat emptor”. Still, it would be deliciously ironic to watch such a bleeding-edge lawsuit proceed against a trial lawyer.
All that being said, I don’t think it has anything to do with the issue of large contributors getting legally-mandated refunds for their donations to the general election campaign. And I don’t think small contributors who only contributed to the primary campaign are being unfairly treated compared to the large contributors (who by definition also got shafted for their full $2300 maxed-out contributions to the primary campaign).
Reply
DP Wiener
You’re right, it’s a moral argument involving discretion.
We’ve looked at the refunds and quite a few of the bundlers received not only their general election refund but also the primary refund. Which was one part legal–the general refund—and one part discretion by the campaign.
What we’re arguing is that Edwards is refunding quite a bit of the primary contributions to his bundlers while the “little” contributors aren’t seeing a penny.
Why shouldn’t the “little people” who contributed to the Edwards campaign and now want their money back, the non-bundlers and fat cats, get their money refunded?
Edwards is showing his true colors, he talked the talk but never walked the walk. We don’t mind being advocates for those who need help in getting a refund from Edwards.
Reply