Comment: Here’s where donations to Trump’s recount really go

About 60 percent of donations will go toward paying down his campaign debt; the rest to the RNC.

By Trevor Potter and Brendan Fischer

Special To The Washington Post

President Trump’s campaign has been on a fundraising tear since the election he lost Nov. 3, emailing and texting supporters multiple times per day asking for contributions to his “Official Election Defense Fund.”

The campaign is raising money off false assertions that have apparently helped it pay down its outstanding debt and will help finance the leadership PAC that could allow Trump to retain influence in the Republican Party even after leaving office.

We won’t know how much the Trump campaign and the Republican National Committee have raised through these fundraising appeals until Dec. 3, when post-election campaign finance reports are due. But it doesn’t look like much of the money he’s been raising will actually go to pay for the recounts or the legal challenges.

Although the fundraising emails refer to an “election defense task force” or an “election defense fund,” in reality, donors are giving to the Trump Make America Great Again Committee, where contributions are split between Trump’s committees and the RNC.

Trump’s barrage of lawsuits are incredibly unlikely to have much success, much less change the outcome of the election. And despite these frenzied solicitations asking for money to “defend the election,” the funds these appeals are bringing in are not going first to Trump’s nor the RNC’s recount and legal accounts.

Instead, in the first week after the election, the small print on Trump’s post-election donation landing pages showed that 60 percent of each donation would go toward paying down the campaign’s outstanding 2020 election debt: $1.2 million as of Oct. 14, in the most recent filing deadline, but will likely be much higher for up to Nov. 3. The remaining 40 percent would go to the RNC.

In other words, small donors who gave thinking they were helping to pay for the campaign’s legal bills were in fact largely helping cover the Trump campaign’s debt. Until that debt was paid off, only those donors who had already maxed out at $2,800 to Trump’s 2020 campaign would have any of their money go to Trump’s recount account.

On Tuesday, a week after the election, the small print changed: Now, 60 percent of every donation goes to Trump’s new leadership PAC, Save America. Only after a donor gives the $5,000 legal maximum to Save America would any portion of their contribution go to Trump’s recount effort.

The remainder of every check, 40 percent, goes to the RNC, up to the legal maximum of $35,500. Only donors who’ve maxed out to the RNC will have their contributions deposited in the party’s legal and headquarters accounts, each of which can accept contributions of up to $106,500.

Donations to these committees and their designated legal accounts are regulated by federal law. Trump’s recount account may be used only for campaign-related recount and legal fees; he would violate the law if he were to try to spend any excess funds defending himself against tax or fraud investigations in New York, for instance, or for other personal legal expenses.

However, Trump’s new leadership PAC offers far more flexibility than a recount account. A leadership PAC is supposed to be used to make contributions to candidates, but it also might be used to finance Trump’s travel and rallies, to pay for events at Trump properties and for other purposes. Additionally, although federal law states that any “contribution accepted by a candidate” cannot be used for personal expenses — such as excessive consulting payments to family members or a trip to Disney World — the Federal Election Commission has created ambiguity about the extent to which the personal use ban applies to contributions accepted by a candidate’s or officeholder’s leadership PAC.

In 2018, we at Campaign Legal Center, along with Issue One and five former members of Congress (both Republicans and Democrats), filed a rulemaking petition asking the FEC to clarify that candidates and officeholders cannot abuse funds held in their leadership PAC. The FEC sought and received comments on the petition but so far has failed to act.

Trump has spent the past four years defying norms and the law, and we shouldn’t be surprised if he also seeks to exploit legal gray areas with his new leadership PAC. When the FEC’s quorum is restored, it should act swiftly to adopt rules that prevent Trump or any other candidate from abusing donor funds held in a leadership PAC.

Trevor Potter is a Republican former chairman of the Federal Election Commission and the president of the Campaign Legal Center. Brendan Fischer directs Campaign Legal Center’s work before federal regulatory agencies such as the Federal Election Commission.

Talk to us

> Give us your news tips.

> Send us a letter to the editor.

> More Herald contact information.

More in Opinion

FILE — Supporters of President Donald Trump storm the U.S. Capitol in Washington, Jan. 6, 2021. The Supreme Court’s ruling that Trump enjoyed broad immunity from prosecution over official acts has opened the possibility that more evidence in his attempt to subvert the 2020 election could be revealed in public court filings — maybe even before the upcoming presidential election. (Kenny Holston/The New York Times)
Editorial: As important as voting is acceptance of voters’ will

Regardless of outcome, voters must acknowledge the result, then work within democracy’s framework.

Vote 2024 logo with red and blue text for US presidential election. Election sticker, badge, label, poster, banner, greeting card. Stars and USA flag red strips Vector illustration.
Editorial: A recap of Herald Editorial Board endorsements

The editorial board recommends the following candidates and votes on measures on the Nov. 5 ballot.

We must team up against the climate crisis

My name is Casey and I am a seventh grader at Maplewood… Continue reading

Don’t forget indoor pollution sources from gas

Thank you for the excellent article regarding increased asthma risks in Snohomish… Continue reading

Goldberg: Has the scale of women’s fury been underestimated?

The surprise results of an Iowa poll hint at the possibility of the strength of women in the election.

Comment: Once the ballots are cast, the law must prevail

Americans across the political spectrum share a duty to support the peaceful transition of power.

A wall diagram shows the “journey of the ballot” at the new Elections Center on Tuesday, July 9, 2024 in Everett, Washington. (Olivia Vanni / The Herald)
Editorial: Holding confidence in process, results of election

Election officials have worked to make the process transparent to remove doubts about its integrity.

Waitress wears food at work in the restaurant
Editorial: Everett voters should reject both wage initiatives

The complexities of wage and employment law require consideration of the issues by the city council.

Homeowners Jim and Chris Hall stand beneath their new heat pump, at right, inside their Whidbey Island home on Thursday, Sep. 7, 2023, near Langley, Washington. The couple, who are from Alaska, have decreased their use of their wood burning stove to reduce their carbon footprint. (Ryan Berry / The Herald)
Editorial: Reject 1-2066 to preserve a climate solution

The initiative’s repeal of a state law could make it less affordable to move from gas to electric heat.

toon
Editorial cartoons for Monday, Nov. 4

A sketchy look at the news of the day.… Continue reading

Comment: Whole world is watching, anxious over U.S. election

As much as events will turn on the outcome, any chaos over the results could make things even worse.

Support local journalism

If you value local news, make a gift now to support the trusted journalism you get in The Daily Herald. Donations processed in this system are not tax deductible.