Texas’ top law enforcement officer, Attorney General Ken Paxton, initiated a thorough inspection of ActBlue, a prominent fundraising entity primarily servicing Democratic party candidates. It appears the investigation has yielded some intriguing results, pointing to the presence of a substantial quantity of unclear and potentially fraudulent donations handled through the platform.
This investigation of ActBlue, which was kicked off back in 2023, had previously led to the revelation that the digital fundraising platform had an auxiliary requirement for contributors. Potential donors were mandated to provide the ‘CVV’ security numbers that are typically printed on the reverse of credit cards as an additional step in making their donations.
However, despite these extra security measures, Paxton maintains a defensive stance against ActBlue. He argues that the platform seems to have collected contributions from individuals concealing their true identities behind fictitious ones, thereby raising concerns about the integrity of the platform’s operations.
As per Attorney General Paxton’s recent proclamation, there seems to be a systematic attempt to make contributions using fraudulent identities. This has been facilitated by utilizing untraceable methods of payment. In a significant move, he has taken this matter to the Federal Elections Commission (FEC), asking them to implement new regulations to enhance the security of elections.
In his letter to the FEC, Paxton specifically highlighted a disconcerting trend: the use of ‘straw donors’. These are cases where one person obscures their identity by attributing donations to another unwitting individual. He further added that prepaid cards seem to be the preferred instrument used by those undertaking such fraudulent activities.
In an interesting twist, Paxton pointed out that when FEC was contemplating regulations to curtail the potential misuse of prepaid cards, it was none other than ActBlue who opposed such measures. This is noteworthy as it seems ActBlue might have indirectly enabled the very fraud the regulation intended to prevent.
Paxton warned of the potential implications if the FEC doesn’t step up to mitigate these concerns. If left unchecked, such easy avenues can enable illicit actors to channel foreign funds into the U.S. political system, surpass existing contribution limits, and also violate other campaign finance regulations.
Paxton’s investigation also lent credence to public findings about ActBlue’s practices. This includes the discovery that individuals receiving fixed incomes, who vehemently assert they have not participated in any donations through the platform, were still documented as donors. The extent and frequency of these instances cast doubt on the donor authenticity and how their names came to be associated.
In Paxton’s dialogue with the FEC, he states, ‘These contributions are of such an extensive magnitude that, even devoid of any formal inquiry, it shakes our faith to genuinely consider these transactions were lawfully made by the individual whose name is stated as the contributor.’ This particular concern contributes to the greater narrative Paxton is trying to communicate in his letter to the FEC.
Paxton went further, asserting that public claims about ‘straw contributions’ are indeed accurate. He substantiated this by mentioning an alarming pattern where the same individuals’ names were incorrectly tied to hundreds of distinct contributions, accumulating to significant sums annually.
Moreover, these inexplicable contributions for those individuals were made multiple times a day, for nearly every day in a given year. This finding raises questions about both the identity of the real donors and the potential misuse of others’ identities.
Paxton’s letter calls upon FEC to infuse new amendments to their existing policies to further enhance their effectiveness. One such proposed amendment would require political committees to ascertain that donor identities align with the information held by their payment card’s issuing organization.
Another recommendation suggests that political committees should be considered as ‘non-compliant’ in terms of their obligation to maintain adequate records verifying donor identities. This would be the case if they accept payments through certain types of prepaid cards, which are often abused for fraudulent transactions.
According to Paxton, the investigation shed light on ActBlue’s processes and indicated loopholes that might allow unethical activities to disrupt American elections by camouflaging political contributions. Hence, he firmly believes that the FEC needs to step up and address these vulnerabilities in the system.
Paxton emphasized, ‘It is absolutely critical for the FEC to plug these revealed potential gateways. These gateways might permit unlawful infiltration of foreign contributions or contributions that violate legal limits. This negligence could let them surreptitiously reach political campaigns, bypassing campaign finance guidelines, and threatening the integrity of our electoral system.’