A shadowy conservative group with ties to the operatives behind a host of GOP dirty tricks is working to undermine state restrictions on political robo-calls, as it gears up to unleash a barrage of such calls in 2010 races.
Last month, American Future Fund Political Action (AFFPA) informed the FEC that it's planning robo-calls in congressional races. Jason Torchinsky, a lawyer for AFFPA, wrote that the group "wishes to distribute pre-recorded telephone calls ... as part of a nationwide program of political outreach." The calls, wrote Torchinsky, "will expressly advocate the election or defeat of one or more clearly identified candidates for Federal office."
AFFPA was asking the FEC for an advisory opinion on whether state laws restricting robo-calls should apply, or whether, as AFFPA argues, they're pre-empted by a less restrictive federal law that sought to standardize the regulation of robo-calls. An FEC ruling in AFFPA's favor would badly undermine state laws such as Minnesota's, which requires the listener to actively consent to hearing a recorded message before the message can be played.
That's worth paying attention to in itself. But behind the robo-call effort is a team of high-powered GOP operatives behind a slew of sleazy campaign tactics over the years.
You might remember Torchinsky, AFFPA's lawyer, as one of the architects of the American Center for Voting Rights (ACVR), the bogus "voting-rights" group that was set up by GOP operatives in 2005 to "give 'think tank' academic cachet to the unproven idea that voter fraud is a major problem in elections," as election law expert Rick Hasen has written.
For several months, ACVR's executive director was Alex Vogel, a former RNC lawyer whose consulting firm reportedly was paid $75,000 for the ACVR gig. (Also involved with ACVR: TPMmuckraker favorite Pat Rogers, the New Mexico GOP activist who helped get David Iglesias fired for not pursuing bogus voter fraud complaints.)
Vogel also appears to have a hand in AFF: Torchinsky, a former Bush campaign lawyer, works for the law firm run by Vogel and his wife, Virginia State Senator Jill Holtzman Vogel.
Holtzman Vogel's own political career may owe something to similarly hardball tactics. A former RNC counsel herself, she faced a tight primary in her Virginia Senate race, but prevailed after her opponent, Mike Tate, was indicted for campaign finance irregularities. The person who brought the complaint to the attention of authorities was Holtzman Vogel's baby-sitter, and the local prosecutor who initially handled it was a Holtzman Vogel supporter. The charges against Tate were eventually dropped.
As for AFF itself, the group already has earned a reputation for trafficking in vicious and misleading shots against Democrats. A typical recent ad alleged that the government "planned to give flu shots to detainees at Guantanamo."
It also has worked closely with Dick Armey's FreedomWorks to help promote the Tea Party rallies against health-care reform. Republican heavy-hitters Jan Van Lohuizen, Ed Tobin, Ben Ginsberg are all reportedly involved with the group.
Because AFF is a 501c4, it's not required by law to release much information about itself, and no one seems eager to speak on its behalf. Torchinsky declined to speak to TPMmuckraker on the record. Tim Albrecht, an Iowa GOP activist who now works for the gubernatorial campaign of Terry Branstad, was quoted earlier this month as a spokesman for the group, but told TPMmuckraker that he could no longer serve in that capacity, and declined to pass our inquiry on to any other specific representative, saying only that he could forward it to the group's general mailbox. A separate email to that address went unreturned. AFF's website lists Sandra Greiner, another Iowa Republican, as president, while the Iowa secretary of states database lists Nicole Schlinger, a local GOP consultant as president. Neither Greiner nor Schlinger returned a call.
But it seems clear that voters will be hearing plenty from AFF in the coming year.

TPM Stories Now Surging on Digg.com

JNagarya
November 23, 2009 2:13 PM
So many Germanic surnames.
As for robo-calls: my state prohibits automated -- robo -- calls. The first instance of a violation of that I expereincee was by a Republican candidate for governor. I called his campagin office and spoke to that issue, and the man on the phone said that the state legislature was in the process of revising that statute.
Apparently the falsely asserted revising is the same thing as it already being revised anre therefore legal. Republican logic -- always out ahead of the actual law.
Since then, especially this cycle, everyone running for anything, and regardless party, was using them.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Aaron G Stock
November 23, 2009 2:34 PM
Now would be a great time to suggest to your favorite (or at least preferred) Democratic incumbents and candidates to preempt the robo-calls. As part of their opening campaign, they should start warning all in the district that the calls may come, that the calls will likely distort their records, that the opposing candidates are funded by the same forces who hide behind these calls, that the Democratic incumbents/candidates, by contrast, have nothing to hide, and that their positions are freely available online or via a quick call to their offices.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
rynato
November 23, 2009 3:06 PM
I am fine with robocalls so long as I can invoice the GOP for the minutes they use up on my cellphone carrier's calling plan, as well as the lost time and productivity answering these calls.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
Loonbeam
November 23, 2009 3:40 PM in reply to rynato
I posted this as a blog entry, but here's my response to robocalls. Every time I get one, I put aside a donation to the opposing party. At the end of each campaign, I send a check to the one party and a letter to the other thanking them for their donations...
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
beezling
November 23, 2009 9:07 PM
Okay, what the hell.
We posted a story all about this (and with more salient details) on Huffington Post on November 15.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dawn-teo/making-tea-for-2010-tea-p_b_357635.html
No recognition of that effort? Not even a link? Or a h/t?
You don't even mention Willie Horton or the Swift Boat Veterans. Where's McCarthy? You don't even note that Nicole Schlinger runs a TELEMARKETING FIRM. Which makes it funny that she heads a group trying to wildly expand robocalling.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?
patmcgrowen
November 23, 2009 10:41 PM
Who in the world actually listens, let alone believes anything that a recorded phone calls says? As soon as I realize it is a recording I hang up. It is so insulting that you cannot put up an actual person to share your views and debate the issues with. Generally the rule of thumb is, if it is a recording, it's a scam. And it's just rude.
Reply | Flag Abuse
Are you sure this comment violates TPM's Terms of Service?