Recently, American Public Media’s Marketplace ran a story concerning federal and state campaign finance laws – and in particular Virginia law and RSLC activity in the Commonwealth. Even though the reporter had an exchange with the RSLC spokeswoman – her remarks must have been problematic to his angle, leaving them out and putting his report way off the mark.

This is a portion of what they had to say: “In 2005 a federally registered nonprofit called the Republican State Leadership committee took sides in the state's race for attorney general. At the time no one knew anything about where the group was getting its money. Democrat Creigh Deeds was the candidate on the wrong side of an avalanche of cash.”

You see, Virginia has off year elections and the reporting deadlines to the IRS (where the RSLC files its campaign finance reports) differed from the reporting deadlines to the Virginia State Board of Elections. If you were to read or listen to the report on Marketplace, you would think that the RSLC was created out of thin air the 5 weeks prior to the election of the Virginia Attorney General in 2005. The truth is, the RSLC has been a force on the national scene since 2003 – including a previous election cycle in the Commonwealth. The RSLC is 100% transparent and compliant with federal and state laws across the country. This was all discussed with the reporter – but somehow left out.

Another problem with the report is the law he is talking about – a law that doesn’t even apply to the RSLC. “And Virginia delegate Brian Moran recently pushed a law through the Assembly that would keep outsiders from raising money inside Virginia as a way to skirt their own states' laws.” The law passed by the General Assembly requires 50% of non-federal PAC expenditures to go to Virginia candidates – targeting out of state candidates who raise money through Virginia law. This has nothing to do with the RSLC. So he tried to tie an irrelevant 2005 story to the 2007 law change in an apparent attempt to make the RSLC look bad. The only thing that looks bad is the Marketplace reporting – it simply falls short and off the mark.

We believe in the system of freedom and participation in our democratic process. We also think the reporter had a duty to report the facts – not leave out statements that are contrary to his agenda. When assertions are made those involved ought to have a chance to set the record straight. So since the reporter didn’t do it – we have now told you, as Paul Harvey says, “The rest of the story.”

To hear the story or read the transcript click here.