Dem
51
GOP
49
When you get an e-mail from a Nigerian prince offering a big reward in return for a small investment on your part, you probably instantly know that it is a scam and there is no prince. But what is your reaction when a politician solicits a donation and says it will be matched 2:1, 3:1, or 5:1 by a Nigerian prince or other anonymous donor? Sounds like a good time to donate, right? Actually, no. It's a scam. There is no prince or anonymous donor. It is all made up. Arkansas AG Tim Griffin recently wrote an op-ed for Politico warning people about the scam. Making a donation to a politician you like is fine, just don't expect it to be matched. Oh, and there is no deadline, in contrast to what the e-mails state.
Griffin got the idea of writing the op-ed when one of his campaign consultants told him to include in his fundraising pitch words saying that a donation now would be doubled. When Griffin said that donations would not be doubled, the consultant said that doesn't matter, it is a proven tactic for increasing contributions, and besides, everybody does it. Griffin didn't do it and wrote the op-ed to warn people. In the op-ed, Griffin wrote: "When did it become acceptable for political leaders to deceive their supporters for contributions?" He said that normal puffery ("I'm the best candidate") is fine, but not outright lies.
He also noted that in cases where it is true, that is, there is an anonymous donor matching every contribution, it is probably a crime. Federal law limits donations for federal office to $3,300 per election. The anonymous donor would be allowed to match the first $3,300 worth of small donors who responded to the e-mail, but after that any additional matching would be above $3,300 and thus illegal. Many states also have limits for state elections, so unlimited matching for state elections is also criminal above the threshold. In some states, the limits are quite low. For example, for state Senate races in Montana, the maximum donation is $180. (V)