Donald Trump has made his opposition to the flood of big money in politics a centerpiece of his front-running campaign, frequently lamenting the role of super PACs and the outsized sway of wealthy donors like the Koch brothers. But Trump’s top campaign lawyer, veteran Republican election attorney Donald McGahn, was a crucial player in creating the out-of-control campaign finance system that his boss now denounces.
McGahn helped broker Monday’s meeting between Trump and Republican congressional leaders, which took place at the Washington offices of the law firm Jones Day, where McGahn is a partner.* To date, the Trump campaign has paid Jones Day more than $500,000, according to Federal Election Commission (FEC) filings.
RELATED: Trump’s critics plot as the candidate meets with Republicans
McGahn’s key role on Team Trump undercuts the brash businessman’s claim that he’ll reduce the political influence of billionaires and special interests. And it suggests that Trump’s campaign may intend to tap into other sources of big money, using McGahn’s expertise to push the boundaries of the law.
As a member of the FEC from 2008 to 2013, campaign finance reformers say, McGahn led the successful conservative effort to neuter the agency, with the result that today it is unable to respond to even seemingly egregious violations of campaign finance law. Soon after McGahn joined the FEC as its chair, its three Republican-appointed commissioners have consistently voted as a bloc against enforcement, stymieing the agency from taking action — a situation that has continued since he left.
Lawrence Noble, a former FEC general counsel now with the Campaign Legal Center, which supports stricter campaign finance regulations, points out that the rise of super PACs, which has allowed the uber-wealthy to pour unlimited dollars into electoral politics, wasn’t inevitable after the Supreme Court’s 2010 Citizens United ruling. It happened thanks in part to the FEC’s decision — driven by McGahn and its other GOP-appointed commissioners — to interpret Citizens United broadly, rather than seeking to salvage what it could of campaign finance law.
In other words, if you don’t like today’s almost-anything-goes campaign funding landscape, you can lay part of the blame on McGahn.
“McGahn’s general philosophy has been, the law is too burdensome for the poor political people who want to run campaigns,” said Noble. “So you ended up with super PACs as effectively arms of the campaigns, and the explosion of dark money because they cut back on disclosure rules … It’s fair to say he was a leader in a lot of that.”
Craig Holman of Public Citizen, another pro-reform group, goes further. “McGahn’s role was to bring the FEC into dysfunction so that the campaign finance laws could easily be sidestepped,” Holman said via email.
RELATED: ‘Citizens United’ fallout ‘more dangerous’ than expected
McGahn declined to comment in detail for this story. But his conservative defenders argue that he was right not to enforce campaign finance laws that violate the Constitution. They say the FEC should ensure that the First Amendment rights of campaigns and contributors are protected from overzealous regulation.
McGahn himself appears to relish his role in upending the agency, noting in a brief email to MSNBC that “others have called my tenure the most consequential of any commissioner.” Indeed, McGahn seems never to have believed in a strong role for the agency in enforcing campaign finance laws. “You’re gonna appoint your guys to make sure you are taken care of,” he told the author of a 2003 academic study of the commission. “The original intent was for it to be a glorified congressional committee. That’s the way I see it.”









