The Spirit of Democracy America super PAC, which registered with the Federal Election Commission on May 14, has no website.

Money, however, was not a problem. The super PAC reported spending more than $160,000 supporting Republican Rep. Paul Cook with a series of media buys during his tightly contested primary campaign in California’s 8th congressional district — a total that accounted for 64 percent of all the outside spending in the race.

The source of the funds that fueled Spirit’s expenditures in that race, though, is still unknown. Thanks to a particular quirk in FEC reporting rules, the group was able to run ads in the run-up to the California primary without disclosing its donors. When voters went to the polls June 5 and sent Cook on to the general election ballot, they did so without knowing where a heavy hitting super PAC came up with the money it used to try to influence their votes.

The office of Spirit’s treasurer, Thomas Hiltachk — a partner at a law firm with which the group shares an address — did not respond to requests for comment. And Spirit of Democracy America is not alone. It and eight other super PACs that collectively spent nearly $1.3 million in recent primaries disclosed just $37,318 in 2012 cycle contributions prior to the time votes were cast, according to a Center for Responsive Politics analysis. Any super PAC choosing to submit its reports to the FEC on a quarterly schedule must file a pre-election report detailing its finances — including donors’ names — before a primary in which it is active. But then there’s a black hole — a period of 20 days before the primary election, during which the group can take in and spend money without disclosing its donors until the next quarterly filing. In other words, by timing their expenditures just right in the races on which they focused, these super PACs are able to keep their donors under the radar until after the primaries. The public will learn who the contributors were on July 15. Some of the groups participated in the 2010 elections, which means there’s a record of their earlier contributors. But for some of the groups that were spending during the primary campaigns, there are still no donors in the public record and no indication of the groups’ leadership.

The spending patterns of the Conservatives Acting Together PAC, or CATPAC, demonstrate the loophole. The super PAC filed a pre-primary report on May 16 disclosing all donors and expenditures from April 5 to May 9. CATPAC reported having received just $20,500 in contributions, and that it was down to less than $25 cash on hand.

Yet the day after its report, CATPAC made a nearly $100,000 radio buy supporting Michael Williams‘ bid for the GOP nomination in Texas’ 25th congressional district.

The super PAC filed with the FEC March 19, then must have raised more than $170,000 from the beginning of April through its election-week media buys on April 18 and 20. Like the Spirit of Democracy America PAC, the group did not return a request for comment and will not have to report the sources of its funding until mid July. The Ending Spending Action Fund is a different sort of committee — one with a track record. It disclosed the source of its 2012 funding after a request from OpenSecrets Blog. The group, which spent nearly $255,000 aiding Republican Deb Fischer‘s bid for the GOP Senate nomination in Nebraska, is part of Ameritrade founder J. Joe Rickett’s anti-federal spending network, which also was involved in the 2010 elections. While the group had reported no 2012 donations prior to the election, a spokesman, like those at other groups, said that the lack of disclosure was a result of the FEC’s filing schedule and not a strategy to keep donations secret. The spokesman also said that the funding for the Nebraska ads had come from Ricketts himself. That was confirmed by the group’s recent FEC filings, which show Ricketts — and his $510,000 in contributions — as the group’s sole donor of an amount greater than $200 so far this year. (Ending Spending, which had been a quarterly filer, has changed to a monthly filing schedule; the report detailing the committee’s pre-primary finances was filed June 20). Primary spending without donor disclosure was not entirely limited to Republican races.

OpenSecrets Blog. Working for Us PAC , led by former AFL-CIO and Clinton White House official Steve Rosenthal, spent about $55,000 supporting Rep. Mark Critz (D-PA) and opposing Democratic incumbent Rep. Jason Altmire in their race for the nomination in the newly redistricted Pennsylvania 12. The group disclosed less than $10,000 in 2012 donations prior to the election, but denied any attempt to game the system when contacted by “We frankly don’t care [about publicly disclosing donors],” said PAC official Jenna Fullmer. “We’re not trying to hide anything.” Fullmer said that the group’s quarterly filing schedule was determined by its FEC compliance team and was not part of the PAC’s strategy. Other groups that spent heavily in primaries without disclosing most of their donors were pro-independent group IcPurple, the Real Street Conservatives PAC and the American Dental Association super PAC — which has supported two Republican dentists in their races for GOP House nominations. IcPurple has since filed a report detailing its primary donors, having switched to a monthly filing schedule. Photo: Flickr user kennethkonica



For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: Feel free to distribute or cite this material, but please credit the Center for Responsive Politics.For permission to reprint for commercial uses, such as textbooks, contact the Center: [email protected]

·

·

·

·

·

Support Accountability Journalism At OpenSecrets.org we offer in-depth, money-in-politics stories in the public interest. Whether you’re reading about 2020 presidential fundraising, conflicts of interest or “dark money” influence, we produce this content with a small, but dedicated team. Every donation we receive from users like you goes directly into promoting high-quality data analysis and investigative journalism that you can trust. Please support our work and keep this resource free. Thank you. Support OpenSecrets ➜

Read more OpenSecrets News & Analysis: