Koster’s Ethics Questioned, Check exchange raises concerns
Columbia Tribune
Published Wednesday, July 9, 2008
JEFFERSON CITY (AP) - They met at an Italian restaurant in southwest Missouri. A campaign aide for Democratic attorney general candidate Chris Koster and the treasurer of a local Democratic committee. The purpose: a check exchange.
Koster’s aide handed the Democratic official a check from an innocuous-sounding group called the Economic Growth Council, along with a pair of letters she had created - one from the Economic Growth Council accompanying its money, the other from Koster’s campaign soliciting money from the local political committee.
The letters were formalities. The Democratic official provided Koster’s aide a pair of checks similar in size to the amount she had received.
Just like that, Koster’s campaign channeled nearly $27,000 to itself - part of the roughly $450,000 from big-time donors that got routed around campaign contribution limits to Koster in a three-month period.
E-mail communications obtained by The Associated Press show Koster’s campaign staff helped direct donors wishing to give more than the state limit to the Economic Growth Council, then coordinated the transfer of that money to local political party committees and onto Koster’s campaign - a potential violation of an 8-year-old ruling against such orchestration.
The documents were provided to the AP by someone close to Koster’s campaign on the condition of anonymity because the person is not authorized to speak for the campaign.
Koster defends his fundraising tactics as legal - and similar to those being used by other major statewide candidates.
But it’s unclear whether other campaign staffs have been so deeply involved in coordinating the money shuffling. A former Koster campaign aide now is concerned the tactics might have been illegal.
Officials at the Missouri Ethics Commission are reluctant to say publicly whether fundraising scenarios such as Koster’s violate campaign finance laws, in case they later are asked to make a ruling.
But "that’s getting awfully close," said former Ethics Commission executive director Bob Connor, who remains on staff at the commission. "That could come before the commission if somebody thought it was improper."
The Ethics Commission historically has granted candidates considerable leeway. For example, regulators have said candidates can both raise money for other political committees and solicit contributions from those committees.
But in a 2000 opinion that remains in effect today, the Missouri Ethics Commission said candidates cannot request that contributions be made to other political committees "with the express purpose of passing those contributions through the committee to the candidate."
"I strongly believe - because we have acted in consultation with the law, the rulings and on the advice of the ethics commission - that we are in line with campaign finance laws," Koster said in an interview at his Jefferson City campaign headquarters.
Koster is facing state Reps. Margaret Donnelly and Jeff Harris in the Aug. 5 Democratic attorney general primary. The winner might no longer have to worry about campaign contribution limits because a bill pending before Gov. Matt Blunt would repeal them effective Aug. 28.
A state senator and former Cass County prosecutor, Koster is a prolific fundraiser who switched from the Republican to Democratic Party shortly before he announced his attorney general candidacy in fall 2007.
Like other statewide candidates, Koster reaped five- and six-figure contributions while Missouri’s donation limits were temporarily lifted during the first half of 2007. After the Missouri Supreme Court reinstated the limits, Koster joined other statewide candidates in refunding all donations above the retroactively reinstated maximum of $1,275.
For Koster, that meant returning about $370,000. His refund checks were dated Dec. 17. The next day, the Economic Growth Council was created with the Ethics Commission by Chuck Hatfield, a former top aide to Democratic Attorney General Jay Nixon. Koster had befriended Hatfield in law school and later served as the best man in Hatfield’s wedding.
Hatfield said the creation of the Economic Growth Council was his own idea.
About 70 percent of Koster’s Christmastime refunds were re-donated to the Economic Growth Council, including $125,000 from stem-cell research supporter James Stowers and $17,450 from Ameristar casinos. The point man for both donors was lobbyist Jorgen Schlemeier.
So why give to Hatfield’s committee?
"The treasurer at the Economic Growth Council made a very clear statement that we’re founded to help Chris Koster out," Schlemeier said.
Through the first three months of 2008, the council reported receiving $493,825 from various donors, nearly all of which was routed to Koster.
The council directly gave Koster the maximum $1,350. Much of the rest made its way to Koster by first passing through local political party committees, which can give almost 20 times the amount toward candidates as individuals, businesses and interest groups.
On March 19, then-Koster campaign staffer Susan McNay sent en e-mail to Hatfield with the names of 29 local political committees and the amounts of money each was to receive from the Economic Growth Council. Hatfield responded that he would write the checks.
McNay, who has since left Koster’s campaign, said Koster asked her to deliver the Economic Growth Council checks to the local political party committees so that she could exchange them for contributions to Koster’s campaign. In several cases, McNay acknowledged, she also used her Koster campaign computer to create a memo bearing Hatfield’s name on Economic Growth Council letterhead that accompanied the checks to the political committees.
Koster said he was unaware McNay used campaign equipment to create Economic Growth Council documents, though McNay said she had informed Koster of what she was doing.
In essence, McNay was working for the Economic Growth Council - driving thousands of miles around the state as a check courier - while being paid by Koster’s campaign.
"I trusted the candidate, even though I had questions about whether we were doing something that was not right," McNay said. "He assured me everything was fine, and now I have concerns that we broke the law."
On March 25, for example, McNay met Shelby County Clerk Tracy Smith outside a northern Missouri courthouse to hand over a $2,550 check to the 18th Senatorial District Democratic Committee of which Smith is treasurer. In exchange, McNay received a $2,350 check to Koster’s campaign.
The next day, about 330 miles to the southwest, McNay met Jasper County Democratic Chairwoman Susan DeCarlo at an Italian restaurant in Joplin. It was the second time she had delivered a $13,750 check for the 129th Legislative District Democratic Committee of which DeCarlo is treasurer. McNay left the restaurant with a pair of $13,450 checks - one a direct contribution to Koster, the other an indirect contribution made payable to Koster’s advertising buyer, LUC Media of Marietta, Ga.
Koster contends other campaigns also routinely use staffers to shuttle and flip checks through political committees, though he cited no one specifically by name. Hatfield also defended it as legal, adding: "This level of coordination with campaigns is not unusual."
Koster pointed to a July 2004 Ethics Commission decision rejecting a complaint alleging Democratic Gov. Bob Holden had violated campaign finance laws. In that case, a volunteer for Holden had delivered a check from the Missouri Democratic Party to a local political committee, which then gave her a check for Holden.
Perhaps the most comparable situation to Koster’s is that of Republican gubernatorial candidate Sarah Steelman. Two wholesome-sounding committees - Power to the People and the Committee for Common Sense Values - contributed more than $120,000 during the first three months of the year to various local political party committees, which passed the money onto Steelman.
But Steelman spokesman Spence Jackson said he is unaware of anyone on Steelman’s campaign staff personally delivering and picking up the checks.
Nixon, a Democrat, and Republican Kenny Hulshof both also have received dollars that flowed from their state party committees through local political committees to their gubernatorial campaigns. But spokesmen for Nixon and Hulshof
both denied campaign staff ever had been involved in shuffling those checks between committees.
Start the bidding
St. Louis Post Dispatch
Published Thursday, July 17, 2008
Last Saturday, the day after Missouri Gov. Matt Blunt signed Senate Bill 1038, which repeals the limits on campaign contribution to state political candidates, we pulled up behind a car on Chippewa Street and noticed a bumper sticker that read:
"We don't have a democracy. We have an auction."
The timing was accidental but the truth was undeniable: Beginning Aug. 28, Missourians (and for that matter, non-Missourians interested in buying a piece of state government) can donate any amount they want to candidates for any political
office in the state, as long as they're willing to be identified publicly.
The contribution limits that voters approved overwhelmingly just 14 years ago - limits that later were upheld by the United States Supreme Court - were tossed out this spring on mostly party-line votes by the Republican-controlled Legislature.
It was the second year in a row that this had happened. Last year, the state Supreme Court threw out the new law for technical reasons. This year, it's likely to stick.
In fact, this year's bill is even worse than the one the Supreme Court threw out. Last year, the bill removed the limits on individual contributions but also eliminated the practice of laundering campaign contributions through state party
committees or issue committees. The Legislature said this would allow greater "transparency."
This year, nobody brought up transparency. The laundromat is still in business. Starting Aug. 28, Missouri will have the worst of both worlds: unlimited money and limited transparency.
How does it work? Let's say you want to open the world's largest rattlesnake ranch next to a day care center. After Aug. 28, if you've got a million bucks to donate, you can do so openly. Today, you have to funnel the money through party
or issue committees, making it harder to trace. You're not allowed to tell the committees how to spend the money, but most of them are happy to cooperate.
In fact, as David Lieb of the Associated Press bureau in Jefferson City reported earlier this month, the campaign of state Sen. Chris Koster of Belton, who's running for the Democratic nomination for attorney general, has
provided typing and courier services. In one instance Mr. Lieb cited, a campaign aide for Mr. Koster provided solicitation letters and donation letters and then picked up checks to launder for the Koster campaign.
The money was donated by a group called the "Economic Growth Council," set up by an old pal of Mr. Koster, Chuck Hatfield, a former top aide to Missouri Attorney General Jay Nixon, the presumptive Democratic nominee for governor.
After Aug. 28, this kind of low-rent subterfuge no longer will be necessary.
But if a candidate wants to avoid the potential embarrassment of being tied to the rattlesnake ranching industry, he'll still have the party committee laundromat option.
This is bad enough at the state government level, where a good reporter occasionally will track down the real source of laundered money. But the new campaign law applies to every political office in Missouri. If a local zoning board
is preventing you from opening your rattlesnake ranch, you can pay to elect a new city council.
The United States Supreme Court consistently has ruled that campaign spending is a protected form of speech, but it has allowed limits on individual contributions. At the federal level, the limit is $2,300 in the primary and
another $2,300 in the general election. In Missouri, the old limits were $1,350 per election for statewide candidates, with lower limits for other offices.
Federal election laws also allow candidates to choose to run their primary and general election campaigns with public funds. Sen. Barack Obama of Illinois, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, broke a pledge to
abide by the federal limits. Mr. Obama claims that by tapping a wide base of Internet supporters, he has created an alternative form of public financing. That argument is pragmatic, not principled, and particularly disappointing
in one who claims the mantle of reformer.
But there are tens of millions of contributors to a presidential campaign and a far brighter spotlight. At the state and local level, the number of contributors is far more limited, and the spotlight not nearly so bright.
The opportunity for sleaze is enormous.
Politicians have no real incentive to do the right thing. So in 2009, Missourians who want to regain control of their own state government will have to do what they did in 1994: Take matters into their own hands with an
initiative petition drive. Put the limits back, and this time close the laundromat, too.
Candidates skirt donation limits
St. Louis Post Dispatch
Published Sunday, July 6, 2008
Raising funds for political campaigns in Missouri used to be simple: Donors, adhering to campaign limits and clearly identifying themselves, gave money to candidates. But over the past four years, the process has been transformed into a
Byzantine maze that skirts the restrictions and largely hides the identities of those who hand over the cash.
The maze is made up of campaign committees that can receive - and, in some cases, distribute - donations far larger than the state's individual limits, which now range from $325 to $1,350 per candidate per election.
And the original sources of the money sent through those committees don't appear on any candidate's campaign report. In their place are campaign committees - often with benign-sounding names such as Missourians for Tax Reform or the Economic
Growth Council.
In 2004, Missouri's major-party statewide candidates collected $337,612 - 11 percent of their campaign money - from campaign committees.
For this fall's elections, those numbers have skyrocketed.
An examination by the Post-Dispatch of the latest figures available shows that between Oct. 1 and March 31, the 16 people who are running for statewide office or already hold such an office collected almost $3.8 million
from a cornucopia of committees.
That is 43 percent of the candidates' total collections raised in that same six-month period.
The next reports, to be filed July 15, will again shine a spotlight on the practice, which allows a small number of people and groups to wield more influence than they would have without it.
The Post-Dispatch review reveals:
- Big beneficiaries include the three major contenders for governor: Attorney General Jay Nixon, a Democrat, and his two Republican rivals, U.S. Rep. Kenny Hulshof and state Treasurer Sarah Steelman.
As of March 31, Nixon had collected almost a third of his money - $715,599 out of $2.2 million - from campaign committees. Hulshof reported a similar percentage - $304,500 out of $906,683.
Steelman's tally was even more dramatic: More than half of her contributions - $418,375 out of $737,361 - came from campaign committees.
- The pass-through system has been particularly helpful to one Democrat running for attorney general, state Sen. Chris Koster of Harrisonville. Of the $833,534 that Koster raised between Oct. 1 and March 31, 81 percent came from campaign committees.
- Lt. Gov. Peter Kinder, a Republican running for re-election, collected more than half his money from committees.
- Gov. Matt Blunt, a Republican, collected lots of cash through the setup before announcing in late January that he wasn't running for re-election. Of the $1.1 million he raised in those six months, just under $500,000 came from various committees.
- Much of the money passing through those committees originated with a small group of wealthy individuals, companies and unions that seek to promote pet political causes.
FOLLOWING THE MONEY
Here's how the system works:
Missouri has two major types of campaign committees:
- "Continuing committees,'' which can be established by any individual or group.
- "Political party committees,'' which can be set up by the parties or politicians. They include legislative district and ward committees, which have become prominent players in the pass-through system.
By working together, the two types of committees can transfer lots of money from the pockets of donors to candidates.
By themselves, continuing committees face the same donation restrictions as individuals, if they give directly to candidates. But such committees can give unlimited amounts to political-party committees, whether
it be the state party's committee or a local legislative committee set up by a politician.
The political party committees, in turn, each can dole out 10 times the individual donation limit to any candidate, under current law.
Who are some major donors?
They include the Service Employee International Union, which gave more than $100,000 to the state Democratic Party, and major corporations such as Enterprise Rent-A-Car ($35,000 to the state Democrats and $27,500 to various
Republican committees) and several firms that operate casinos in the state.
Some of the most active contributors are wealthy individuals who seek to advance their causes:
- Rex Sinquefield, a semi-retired financier who seeks an end to Missouri's income tax and supports tax breaks for people who send their children to private or parochial schools.
- Jim Stowers, who with his wife co-founded the Stowers Institute for Medical Research in Kansas City. The couple supports all embryonic stem-cell research allowed under federal law.
- Paul McKee Jr., a developer who has amassed thousands of acres for redevelopment in the city of St. Louis.
- David Humphreys, who with his mother, Ethelmae Humphreys, is active in several financially conservative think tanks and institutes.
Most of these donors either declined to return calls or issued statements underscoring their interest in helping candidates who shared their views.
For the donors, there is one catch in giving money to committees: The law says donors cannot tell the groups how to spend it.
The Missouri Ethics Commission, which monitors campaign finance activities, warned eight years ago that "contributions made to or accepted from political party committees (including legislative committees) cannot be
made in such a manner as to conceal the identity of the actual source of the contribution."
"For example," the commission continued, "candidates cannot request contributions be made to political party committees with the express purpose of passing those contributions through the committee to the candidate."
Political activists in both parties privately say some players in the committee system run afoul of the commission's warning.
Joe Carroll, the Ethics Commission's director of campaign finance, said, "I think everyone understands the ground rules."
But he acknowledges that the commission has its hands full. So far, its files show 365 political-party committees, 1,045 continuing committees and 2,135 candidate committees.
ECONOMIC COUNCIL AND DEMOCRATS
Wealthy donor Stowers said through a spokeswoman that he gave to campaign committees that he believed would forward the money to candidates, such as Koster, who share his views on embryonic-stem cell research.
One of those committees is the Economic Growth Council, whose treasurer is Chuck Hatfield, a lawyer from Jefferson City and a former aide to Nixon who is a close friend of Koster.
In 2007, Hatfield was the lead lawyer in a successful legal fight to restore Missouri's campaign-donation limits after they had been repealed earlier that year.
Hatfield helped set up the council last December to give Democratic donors a way to skirt those limits.
Hatfield acknowledges that he did so after watching Republicans successfully use their own system of committees to amass cash. "You don't want to fight with one hand tied behind your back," he said.
Hatfield said he had heard from several major donors who had gotten large donations back last summer after the state Supreme Court reinstated donation limits.
"They wanted their money to remain in the political process," Hatfield said.
From Jan. 1 to March 31, the Economic Growth Council collected almost $500,000, including $125,000 from Stowers and $100,000 from Carey & Danis, a Clayton law firm.
The council then gave more than $300,000 to more than a dozen Democratic legislative committees. Many of the legislative committees share the same address and treasurer. For example, at least 10 Democratic legislative committees
list a boat dock on the Mississippi River in St. Charles as their mailing address.
Hatfield emphasizes that his committee follows the law and refrains from telling the political-party committees which candidates should get the money.
Still, those legislative committees made contributions totalling $170,000 to Nixon and $298,050 to Koster.
SINQUEFIELD'S 100-PLUS
Sinquefield, who favors a mix of Republican and Democratic candidates, set up more than 100 political action committees last year after limits were restored.
The committees get most or all of their money from Sinquefield. Each committee - such as "Missourians for Tax Reform'' and "Missourians Supporting Teaching Excellence" - can donate the same maximum amount that applies to Sinquefield.
Since October 2007, Sinquefield has distributed more than $700,000 to his committees, which in turn gave at least $300,000 to candidates as of March 31. The biggest beneficiaries include state Senate
President Pro Tem Michael Gibbons, R-Kirkwood ($49,150), and Blunt ($124,950).
Sinquefield and his committees donate to candidates in both parties who agree with his proposals.
Sinquefield has been open about his donations, which he repeatedly has said are aimed at advancing his vision for the state.
"My whole motivation is to try to make Missouri a better place,'' he said in an interview last year. "I have no secret issues. I have no secret agenda."
REPEAL OF LIMITS
Some critics predict that use of committees will fade if the state's contribution limits are repealed in late August, as expected. Blunt has indicated that he will sign into law a repeal bill approved by the Legislature this spring.
"I think we were all concerned about the increasing amount of legal money laundered through these committees,'' said Gibbons, who supported getting rid of the limits and now is running for attorney general. "We want to make it transparent."
But when the final version of the repeal was passed, the pass-through system of committees was left untouched.
As a result, some say, Missouri's campaign-finance system and the candidates who profit will be just as awash with hard-to-trace cash.
"The bill that was passed reformed the wrong thing," said state Rep. Jeanette Mott Oxford, D-St. Louis, who voted against the repeal. "They just wanted an excuse to get rid of the limits."
Why didn't the repeal bill outlaw the pass-through system?
"I don't recall there being much discussion about it," said Gibbons.
As of March 31, 43 percent of Gibbon's campaign collections came via the committee system.
In the case of the Economic Growth Council, Hatfield said that after the donation limits were repealed, the group might just give directly to candidates.
But Sinquefield said he planned to continue to use many of his committees to distribute donations if the limits disappeared.
The system will "continue to be a useful tool for voters who share a common vision and set of beliefs,'' he said in a statement. "I expect that, whether campaign finance limits are in place or not,
the process of individuals uniting to support causes they care deeply about will continue."
Mo. AG candidate Koster named in ethics complaints
Fort Mills Times
Published Tuesday, July 15, 2008
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. - A trio of ethics complaints filed Tuesday accuse state Sen. Chris Koster of illegally laundering money for his Democratic attorney general's campaign in violation of state contribution limits.
The complaints were brought by supporters of Koster's three main political rivals for attorney general - Democrats Jeff Harris and Margaret Donnelly and Republican Mike Gibbons.
The three supporters said their complaints were prompted by an Associated Press article last week that described how Koster's paid campaign staff shuttled money among various committees to get around the state's campaign contribution limits.
Koster has defended his fundraising tactics as legal. A spokesman downplayed the complaints - filed on the same day that candidates reported their latest fundraising figures - as a stunt.
"This is yet another political gimmick drummed up by Republicans scared of running against Koster in the fall and desperate Democratic politicians who know their records in law enforcement just don't
stack up," said Koster campaign spokesman Danny Kanner.
The Missouri Ethics Commission can neither confirm nor deny when it receives complaints. It has 15 business days to rule on them, putting the deadline at Aug. 6 - the day after the primary election.
The complaints were filed by Republican Sen. Scott Rupp, a Gibbons supporter; Senate Minority Leader Maida Coleman, a Harris supporter; and St. Louis attorney Marion Eisen, a Donnelly supporter who worked
in the attorney general's office under Republicans John Ashcroft and William Webster in the 1980s.
They allege Koster used "a laundering scheme designed to evade (the law's) campaign contribution limits and to conceal the true identity of contributors."
Rupp's complaint asks the Ethics Commission to bar Koster from using any of the "laundered money," to impose substantial penalties and to refer the case for potential criminal prosecution.
Candidates for statewide offices are limited to accepting $1,350 per election from each individual, business or interest group. But they can accept nearly 20 times that amount in cash and indirect aid from political party committees.
E-mail communications obtained by The Associated Press show Koster's campaign staff helped point donors who wanted to give more than the individual limit to the Economic Growth Council,
a political action committee created by Koster supporter Chuck Hatfield.
The documents show Koster's campaign staff then coordinated the transfer of that money to local political party committees and on to Koster's campaign. Former Koster campaign aide
Susan McNay personally delivered some of those checks between committees. In some cases, she also used her Koster campaign computer to create memos on Economic Growth Council letterhead that accompanied the money.
McNay has since expressed concerns that the funding tactics may have violated the law.
In a 2000 opinion that remains in effect, the Missouri Ethics Commission said candidates cannot request that contributions be made to other political committees
"with the express purpose of passing those contributions through the committee to the candidate."
In an interview, Rupp called Koster's reported fundraising tactics "an egregious assault on everything we stand for." Coleman said she would have filed a similar complaint against anyone who engaged in such tactics,
regardless of his or her political party.
Koster could go down in Missouri history
The Kansas City Star
Published Saturday, July 12, 2008
If Republican-turned-Democrat Chris Koster winds up winning his party's nomination for attorney general, he deserves automatic induction into Missouri's Political Hall of Fame.
There is no such thing, but if Koster snares a win in August, someone should form one and ready a spot for the Harrisonville state senator.
Almost anyone familiar with Missouri politics will tell you that Koster has "the gift." He can talk. He has the look, with ambition to match. He has an always-valuable political credential - a background in law enforcement.
For someone with his natural attributes, here's guessing that Koster would translate, perhaps easily, an August primary win into a second triumph in November in a year that shapes up as big-time Democratic.
Then for Koster, the future would know no limits. The governorship, the U.S. Senate or who knows what else - all would be within his reach because attorney general remains the best political launching pad in
the state. (See: Jack Danforth, John Ashcroft).
But first he has to win in August, a race that could be Koster's toughest. Last week saw both the soaring potential of Koster's candidacy and its dark underbelly.
On Monday, party switch notwithstanding, Koster picked up the endorsement (thanks in part, perhaps, to well-placed political donations) of influential St. Louis Congressman Lacy Clay,
who called him "the most prepared Democrat to keep the streets of our communities safe."
The same day, Koster's campaign trumpeted endorsements from a slew of influential east-Missouri Democrats: state Sen. Tim Green, state Sen. Jeff Smith, St. Louis City Democratic Chairman Brian Wahby and former
St. Louis Mayor Freeman Bosley Jr.
All that backing came despite Koster's background as a longtime card-carrying member of the Grand Old Party. The same day, one of his rivals for the Democratic nomination,
Jeff Harris, underscored that history with his first TV spot. (Koster's other chief rival is state Rep. Margaret Donnelly of St. Louis).
"Chris Koster says he's a Democrat. But do Democrats appear in ads for John Ashcroft? Chris Koster did. Do Democrats support George Bush for president? Chris Koster did... So what kind of Democrat
is Chris Koster? Maybe Chris Koster's not a Democrat at all."
But the damage that spot may inflict could pale in comparison to the story The Associated Press broke the next day that raised serious questions about the Koster campaign's
funneling of money through back-channel sources.
Long story short, this is potentially illegal stuff, although Koster said the campaign complied with the law and worked closely with the state ethics commission that regulates campaign fundraising.
Allegations of illegal campaign money laundering are hardly a selling point for a guy who wants to be the state's highest-ranking law enforcement officer.
Still, Koster has one big advantage for a down-ballot candidate, and that's money. He's expected to be the best-funded candidate, and that translates to lots of TV ads, and that often translates to victory.
If Koster can get past all this in August - the party switch, the fundraising questions - then he deserves to stand next to Danforth and Ashcroft and Mel Carnahan and Kit Bond and other recent greats in state political history.
If Koster wins, bronze him.
Fundraising by Koster called into question
The Kansas City Star
Published Tuesday, July 8, 2008
State Sen. Chris Koster's campaign for attorney general found itself at the center of a storm Tuesday over allegations that his campaign used back-channel sources to skirt contribution limits.
The Associated Press reported that a member of Koster's campaign staff traveled throughout the state, funneling campaign contributions as large as nearly $27,000 from wealthy contributors and special interests into Koster's campaign. State law currently limits individual contributions to a maximum of $1,350.
The Koster campaign denied its actions were inappropriate.
But Susan McNay - who no longer works for Koster's campaign - told The Kansas City Star that her job was to run over-the-limit campaign contributions through political party fund-raising groups, which are allowed to donate nearly 10 times that individual contribution limit.
McNay said she created documents to justify the contributions and make it appear that the donations were independent of Koster's campaign.
"I trusted the candidate, even though I had questions about whether we were doing something that was not right," McNay told the AP. "He assured me everything was fine, and now I have concerns that we broke the law."
Koster was unavailable, but his campaign issued a statement calling the issue "an attempt at high drama where none exists." The statement said all the campaign's actions complied with the law and had been done in consultation with the Missouri Ethics Commission, which regulates campaign fundraising.
"As the article points out, use of (political party) committees is common practice among statewide campaigns and has been explicitly authorized by the Ethics Commission," the Koster campaign said.
Although party committees are widely used to funnel large contributions to candidates, the law requires the committees to make independent decisions about who will receive contributions.
The difference in this case is the degree to which Koster's campaign was involved in those decisions.
After the Missouri Supreme Court restored contribution limits last year, Koster was forced to refund about $370,000 to his supporters. On Dec. 18, the day after those refunds were issued, a fundraising committee was set up by Chuck Hatfield, a former chief of staff in the attorney general's office who is a close friend of Koster's, according to the AP.
Some 70 percent of the refunds that Koster's campaign made were eventually donated to Hatfield's committee, known as the Economic Growth Council. That included a $125,000 contribution from James Stowers, founder of the Stowers Institute for Medical Research in Kansas City.
A spokeswoman for Stowers on Tuesday acknowledged that he donated specifically to support Koster's campaign.
"When he made the contribution to the Economic Growth Council, he wasn't in position to tell them what to do with it," Laurie Roberts said. "They clearly gave us the impression it would be used to support Koster's campaign."
By March 31, the council reported raising $493,825, nearly all of which eventually made its way to Koster, the AP reported.
This is the way it worked, according to the AP:
Koster's campaign would direct contributors to send their refunds or other contributions to the Economic Growth Council. McNay then sent an e-mail on March 19 to Hatfield listing the amounts his group should give to 29 local political party committees.
The Economic Growth Council wrote the checks to the political party committees. Each political party committee would then write checks to the Koster campaign, keeping a small amount for itself. McNay met with local committee directors to exchange checks.
McNay told The Kansas City Star that her assignment was to organize contributions to local political party committees, which would then give them to Koster's campaign. McNay said she determined the amounts that Hatfield's group would contribute to each of the political party committees she mentioned in her March 19 e-mail. It was simply part of her job.
Koster spokesman Danny Kanner said Tuesday nothing was wrong with such an exchange of checks because Hatfield made independent decisions to contribute to those party committees supporting Koster. If he had contributed to Koster's opponents, Koster could do nothing about it, Kanner said.
McNay also said that in several cases she used her computer at the Koster campaign to create a cover letter for the donations that included Hatfield's name under an Economic Growth Council letterhead.
Koster told the AP that he was unaware that McNay used campaign equipment to create those documents. But McNay said she had informed Koster of her actions.
Koster, a former Republican prosecutor from Cass County who switched to the Democratic Party last year, is one of three major candidates seeking the Democratic nomination for attorney general.
His opponents - state Reps. Margaret Donnelly of St. Louis County and Jeff Harris of Columbia - said the Koster campaigns actions went beyond routine bundling of contributions.
"This story raises serious questions and demands a thorough investigation," Donnelly said. Harris said, "There does seem to be a pattern of looking for shortcuts with him."
