Houston Democrats

The Ruling via Quorum Report:

1. The "express advocacy" defense did not apply to TRMPAC because its stated goal was supporting or opposing candidates.

2. TRMPAC's defense questioning the intent of the questionable dollars for campaigns did not hold water because the presumption had to be that contributions were "intended not to be used in connection with a campaign." That is not an acceptable assumption. Therefore, money received by TRMPAC did constitute political contributions subject to the Texas Election Code.

3. Judge Hart did not accept TRMPAC's argument that it used corporate dollars for administrative expenses which is permissible. He writes, " I find that all of the expenditures by TRMPAC were made "in conncection with a campaign for an elective office" and fit within the statutory definition of campaign expenditure."

The Judge awarded the plaintiffs $196,660

Many of these elements parallel the criminal case pursued by Travis County District Attorney Ronnie Earle. However, civil litigation requires only a preponderance of the evidence to find for the plaintiffs. Criminal standards require "beyond a shadow of a doubt."

As a result of the ruling, TRMPAC Treasurer Bill Ceverha is required to pay $196,000 that will be divided among the five Democratic candidates who lost in the 2002 Texas races.

Of course, Ceverha argues that he did no wrongdoing. His lawyers attempted to make the case that TRMPAC had operated legally even though there was "confusion" over state campaign funding laws.

The Houston Chronicle reports:

TRMPAC defense lawyer Terry Scarborough said the lawsuit was more about Democrats' anger over losing than about the actions of DeLay or of Texas House Speaker Tom Craddick. The plaintiffs had sought to tie both men to the activities of the committee, run by DeLay associates.

Newsflash: DeLay has not been accused of any wrongdoing.

Hmm, that seems to be a frequent response. He may not be accused of anything yet, but there certainly is a lot of opportunity for it. The ruling against TRMPAC won't help his case any, and only serves as a further example of the rampant corruption within the Republican Party. Three top DeLay fund-raisers and eight corporations have already been indicted in the criminal case. Ceverha still has not been charged for any wrongdoing.

The losing Democratic candidates filed against TRMPAC, alleging the organization violated the state law designed to keep corporate contributions out of elections.

The Democrats alleged that some $600,000 in corporate money was illegally used to influence Texas House races in 2002, the year Republicans won control of the House for the first time in 130 years. Those victories propelled Craddick, the longest-serving House member, to the speaker's post.

Craddick and DeLay were successful in ramming their redistricting bill through the legislature that resulted in the GOP gaining a majority of the seats in the Texas Legislature. The money was alleged to have been used on expenses, including political research, polling, mailing, fund-raising, and conferences, which are all illegal uses of corporate money in Texas. Corporate contributions are supposed to be spent only on administrative purposes. This just goes to show why HB 1348 was so important to make it absolutely clear what activities for which corporate money can and can’t be used.

Fortunately, Hart didn't buy the defense's arguments. Of course TRMPAC is most likely to appeal this ruling, but at least we can mark it down as another victory for Democrats. It will certainly provide more fodder for the 2006 elections. DeLay and TRMPAC appear to be making the best case for why everyone should be concerned about one party rule, and what happens when corporate interests get so closely intertwined in the political system.

Here's to 2006.

Update:

Here's the article in the Washington Post about the TRMPAC ruling.

Off the Kuff and the Stakeholder have more on the issue as well.