Washblog

I believe there is compelling evidence indicating that these last minute contributions were made purposely to escape public and media oversight, and that they constitute illegal earmarking of funds--a clear violation of campaign contribution limits.

Almost all of these contributors to the state party are from individuals who had already donated to Satterberg, most of them having already made maximum contributions. The bulk of the money came into the state party between the 11th and the 17th of October, with a few smaller contributions the following week.  

It seems apparent that the State Republican Party solicited Satterberg supporters and asked them to put in more money to the state party--earmarking those funds for late donations to Satterberg.

Satterberg purchased large amounts of television advertising just before receiving the influx of funds from the Party.  This indicates likely complicity by Mr. Satterberg with the GOP strategy to illegally direct funds to his campaign.

Below is a list of contributions that appear to be earmarked contributions:

• The contribution of John Hennessy, the CEO of a construction company named Nuprecon, appears to be a blatant case of earmarking. Hennessy gave $300 to Satterberg on July 25  On 10/16,  Hennessy put $5,000 into the state Republican Party fund.

  After he made the $300 donation -- and before he made the $5,000 donation, John Hennessy called candidate Bill Sherman to demand that he stop discussing a serious allegation of environmental crime lodged against his company. Satterberg had personally dismissed this case over the objections of other prosecutors in his office. During that conversation, Hennessy strongly implied that he would "get more directly involved" in the race if Sherman did not accede to his demands. The $5,000 contribution to the state Republican Party followed.

• Richard Derham had given $1400 to Satterberg on 6/27 before putting $1,000 more into the party fund.
• Mikal Thomsen had given $1400 on 7/13 and 9/6 before adding $5,000 to the state Republicans.
• George (Skip) Rowley had given $1400 on 7/20 before donating $50,000 to the party.
• Kevin Hughes had given $1400 on 7/30 before putting $2K into the party.
• Michael Malone gave $700 (the max) on 10/3 and then another $5,000 more on 10/26 to the state party.
• Bruce McCaw and Jolene McCaw had given $1900 (both maxed for the general) to Dan on 8/8 and 9/16 before he dumped $25K into the party.
• Mike McGavick and his wife Gaelynn had each contributed $700 on 10/8 (the max for the general) and then McGavick added $5,000 to the party on 10/11.
• Jim Snyder gave $700 total on 9/17 and 10/03 (the max) and then added another $5K to the party on the 12th.
• Reagan Dunn had given $600 to Satterberg on 7/19 and 10/12 and then the Dunn PAC put in $1,000 to the state party.

One other contribution is clearly a case of moving money for the direct benefit of Satterberg:

1. The King County Republicans put $17,500 directly into Mr. Satterberg's campaign on 10/15 (the county party has also made $5,900 in in-kind contributions).  On the same day it moved $25,500 to the State Party.

There is clearly a pattern constituting strong evidence of illegal, earmarked donations in the transfers made by the state and county Republican parties to Mr. Satterberg's campaign.    They are primarily from individuals who had already maxed out their contributions, a number of them constituted amounts larger than the maximum allowable for individuals, and they do not appear to have been directed to any other candidate, despite the fact that the Republican Party has been involved in a high profile effort to defend the seat of Republican King County Councilmember Jane Hague and in several other races as well.

The fact that $81,015 of these funds were transferred to Satterberg on the Friday afternoon prior to the election is an indication that Chairman Luke Esser and the Washington State Republican Party knew full well that they were violating both the spirit and intent of the law, and that they sought to limit exposure and scrutiny of their actions.  

Please inform me of your intent to investigate this important matter. Thank you for your prompt attention.

Sincerely,

Noemie Maxwell Vassilakis
Kent, Washington