Ben over at NLS has a post up about the Democratic Party of Virginia failing to report the cost of its new website, which was finished in April. (This is not to be confused with the website, They Don’t Get VA, which was just launched a few days ago.) Jason found the cost of the website on the FEC filing for the DPVA, which you can view for yourself here.
Being a CPA, my curiosity was aroused so I did a little digging. I found a reference in regulations at 11 CFR 106.7 that requires an allocation of expenses between Federal and Non-Federal accounts. So in looking at Schedule H4 I see that the payment to Bullseye Interactive on 3/27/07 is listed.
So the payment was made from the Federal account, a portion of which was allocable to the non-federal account. So where is the transfer from the non-federal account to the federal account? Right here. On page 2 of the 6/30/07 state filing, there is a transfer of funds from the state(non-federal) account to the federal account – on 4/27/07 in the amount of $106,967.59. This includes a number of items paid out of the federal account that was for non-federal stuff.
Why do it this way? Simple: write one check instead of two. Can you imagine the bookkeeping nightmare if for every single expenditure that was made, two checks had to be written? Talk about extra work!
Oh, and by the way, note the expenditure to Political CFOs Inc. on page 1 of the last SBE filing. These guys, from what I understand, are the pros in the business of financial filings and, if the DPVA is using them for preparing the reports, then I trust that the reports are done correctly.
So, sometimes, it just takes a little sleuthing – and a bit of accounting knowledge – to figure out what’s going on. The DPVA handled this – and other administrative payments – correctly as far as I can tell.
Obviously, it’s been a slow news day.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Wonderful explanation Vivian. I wonder how Ben will back away from this one.
From time to time it wouldn’t hurt for bloggers to make that oh-so-retro, oh-so-old media phone call to the subject of the expose, hmmmm?
Old media are far from perfect. I had a killer typo in a headline this week that I should have caught. The old-timers do have a few good ideas though.
I wish someone would be as concerned with the DPVA pretending that the rural committees have everything they need.
Rural VA is not being served by the party or the candidates. Even the ones from rural areas.
Hopefully this will change soon.
Mark, I doubt it will change, unfortunately. How DPVA does business is why we are in the minority. I’ve only seen any change at all at the DPVA since the blogosphere has come down on them hard. Keep complaining…the sqeaky wheel gets the oil.
I live in a county (a bedroom community for DC commuters no yet) that could easily elect Democrats however not even one candidate is running as a Democrat for local office. Plenty are running as Republicans though. The would-be-Democrat candidates claim that they get zero support from the local committee which in turn comes under the DPVA’s purvue, guidance, help! So these folks end up running as Independents. The DPVA has been aware of this for quite a long time now and yet the committee “leaders” keep control of the committee year after year after year by avoiding the required reorganization rules every two years.
Good luck.
Sleepless,
personally, I think there have been great improvements to the DPVA since the 2005 election. Gov. Kaine shook up the staff, brought in new people, and we’re seeing the payoff now. I’ll remind folks we have 3 party field organizers thanks to Reger and Gov. Kaine. That alone is change worthy of praise that the “blogosphere” doesn’t mention. The only complaints I’ve ever heard from bloggers are about the DPVA logo and website, trivial! I think the blogosphere is full of people who want to complain about what *other* people aren’t doing rather than stepping up and taking initiative on their own.
FYI – county committees are charter entities of their own, if they don’t want to listen or take direction from the state party, they don’t have too. Nobody can legally force them to provide financial or people resources to candidates.
Actually, Vivian, what continues to make me scratch my head is the “non-federal” part of the FEC filing. There are three numbers for each entry, federal, non-federal and total. Wouldn’t the non-federal have to, at the very least, be reported on the SBE paperwork?
Ach, reading comprehension takes a hit on Saturday mornings. I now see you explain everything. My apologies.
And Dave, I’m sure you’d agree that Ben could also use that old media concept of correcting an error. Newspapers always run a column with corrections of errors that are pointed out to them.
Ben is not an accountant. And he’s not an investigative reporter. Both of those jobs actually take training, skills, and knowledge that most bloggers don’t have (Vivian excepted as a practicing CPA 🙂 ). No matter how good a writer some bloggers are, there’s a lot about journalism they just don’t know.
Citizen activism and netroots blogging are good. But if you want to do investigative reporting, take a course and learn the basics.
proactive – I am stepping up, as I am the committee chair in my county. I see firsthand what goes on and what doesn’t.
I agree that the DPVA has improved, but that doesn’t mean they don’t have a ways to go.
The three organizers you mentioned? They are for every area of Virginia except where I live, and believe me, I have asked over and over what can be done about providing full coverage to the vast Central VA rural area, to no avail.
My committee would love to provide resources to local and other candidates. If and when we get some support from the DNC and DPVA, I am sure more of that will be happening.
Proactive in Virginia,
I’m very surprised to learn that the DPVA has no control over the local committees. Let me get this straight, the local committee can charge a fee to join the committee and the local committee then sends a required amount to the DPVA each year for some reason. So then the membership money is going to the DPVA yet the DPVA’s Party Plan is actually not enforceable and the local committees can do whatever they want? I wasn’t aware of that. I’m glad to learn that.
I’m really surprised too that you haven’t heard complaints other than that the DPVA’s website was a disappointment. And I guess you are right that a political party’s website’s effectiveness is really a trivial matter!
Oh too, if you aren’t aware, the blogosphere and the folks who support it spend endless hours researching topics and writing numerous stories about events, candidates, etc such as Vivian and others do. And for your comment that the blogosphere is full of people who want to complain about what *other* people aren’t doing rather than stepping up and taking initiative on their own….from what I’ve seen, the DPVA seems to take their improvement cues on new ideas from what they are reading in the Virginia blogs!!! Bloggers have great ideas, are incredibly well informed and have turned politics upside down and on its ear by involving the whole Virginia community not just those whom the DPVA communicates with.
And also many folks who blog are incredibly active in campaigns, committees and are directly effective in getting candidates elected. …..Jim Webb comes to mind. And you might be surprised to know that even politicians and candidates write blogs. .
I’ll pass on the information to the local county folks about the DPVA’s lack of authority (i.e., the Party Plan has no authority over local committees and that the committees can do whatever they choose). I guess that explains no bylaws, no reorgs, etc.
Proactive in Virginia,
I forgot to mention …. there are no Democrats running for any of the local offices in the county this year…. not one !!! But there are lots of Republicans proudly running. But you’ve explained it to me and now I understand why.
“From time to time it wouldn’t hurt for bloggers to make that oh-so-retro, oh-so-old media phone call to the subject of the expose, hmmmm?”
But Dave! That might help bloggers avoid “Actual Malice,” legally defined in NY Times v. Sullivan as knowingly publishing false information or the publishing of information with reckless disregard for said information’s veracity! The burden of proof for Actual Malice rests with the plaintiff in every case where a public figure makes claims of libel against a publication or media source. A great example would be Ben continuing to publish his story and updating it to represent that he has new but undefined allegations against Amy Reger in light of all those posts which point out how he has no factual basis for his original accusation.
Ben Tribble may think he gets a free pass and the benefit of the doubt for posting a copy of Creigh Deeds’ speech at BU and writing nice things about a high school sophomore, but the simple fact is that he represents everything that is wrong with bloggers and everything that will keep Old Media like newspapers relevant in the 21st Century.
For that, I suppose, everyone who starts their day as I do, with the Post, the Times and a cup of coffee, should be grateful; but we should all also hold him in contempt for his blatant disregard for the truth.
(Incidentally, he wasn’t invited to participate in a blogger conference for the democratic party; that’s why he’s pissed off and libelling Amy Reger).