Connect with us

Finance

Stacey Abrams-founded groups slapped with historic fine for campaign finance violations

Published

on

Stacey Abrams-founded groups slapped with historic fine for campaign finance violations

A pair of voting advocacy groups founded by failed Democrat Georgia gubernatorial candidate Stacey Abrams were hit with a historic fine by the Georgia Ethics Commission for violating campaign finance laws to bolster Abram’s 2018 election.  

“Today the State Ethics Commission entered into a consent agreement with the New Georgia Project and the New Georgia Project Action Fund for a total of $300,000,” the Georgia State Ethics Commission posted in a statement on Wednesday. “This certainly represents the largest fine imposed in the history of Georgia’s Ethics Commission, but it also appears to be the largest ethics fine ever imposed by any state ethics commission in the country related to an election and campaign finance case.”

Abrams founded the New Georgia Project in 2013 as part of an effort to register more minority voters and young voters. The organization was founded as a charity that can accept tax-deductible donations, while the New Georgia Project Action Fund worked as the organization’s fundraising arm. 

The groups admitted to failing to disclose about $4.2 million in contributions and $3.2 million in expenditures that were used during Abram’s election efforts in 2018, according to the commission’s consent order. The groups were hit with a total of 16 violations, including failing to register as a political committee and failure to disclose millions of dollars in political contributions.

STACEY ABRAMS SAYS TRUMP RE-ELECTION WAS NOT A ‘SEISMIC SHIFT’ OR ‘LANDSLIDE’

Advertisement

Stacey Abrams (Elijah Nouvelage/Getty Images/File)

The groups were accused of carrying out similar activity in 2019, when they reportedly failed to disclose $646,000 in contributions and $174,000 while advocating for a ballot initiative. 

STACEY ABRAMS ACCUSES CNN HOST OF ‘REPEATING DISINFORMATION’ ABOUT HER CASTING DOUBT ON 2018 ELECTION RESULTS
 

“This represents the largest and most significant instance of an organization illegally influencing our statewide elections in Georgia that we have ever discovered, and I believe this sends a clear message to both the public and potential bad actors moving forward that we will hold you accountable,” the ethics commission continued in its statement Wednesday. 

STACEY ABRAMS PRAISED ON ‘THE VIEW’ FOR NOT CONCEDING ELECTION, DEFENDS SAYING SHE ‘WON’ GEORGIA RACE IN 2018

Advertisement

Abrams stepped down from the group in 2017, with Sen. Raphael Warnock taking the reins as the New Georgia Project’s CEO from 2017 to 2019, the Associated Press reported. Warnock was elected as a U.S. senator from Georgia in 2020. 

Raphael Warnock speaking at church

Democrat Georgia Sen. Raphael Warnock, who also serves as the head pastor at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, speaks from the pulpit. (Paras Griffin/Getty Images/File)

A spokesperson for Warnock’s Senate office told the AP that he was working “as a longtime champion for voting rights” and that he was not aware of campaign violations. The spokesperson added that “compliance decisions were not a part of that work.” Fox Digital also reached out to Warnock’s office for additional comment but did not immediately receive a reply. 

Abrams ran for governor of Georgia in 2018 and 2022, but lost to Republican Gov. Brian Kemp in both races. Abrams drew national attention after the 2018 race when she refused to concede to the Republican despite losing by 60,000 votes. 

STACEY ABRAMS ON NOT CONCEDING GEORGIA LOSS: WE SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO ‘LEGITIMATELY QUESTION’ SYSTEMS

Amid the 2018 race, she touted the New Georgia Project on her X account, which was called Twitter at the time.

Advertisement

“When Abrams sees a problem, she doesn’t wait for someone else to step up – she does it herself. So when she saw that 800,000 people of color in Georgia weren’t registered to vote, Abrams immediately set out to fix the problem & founded The New GA Project,” she tweeted. 

The New Georgia Project said in a comment provided to Fox News Digital that they are “glad to finally put this matter behind us” so the group can “fully devote its time and attention to its efforts to civically engage and register black, brown, and young voters in Georgia.”

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

“While we remain disappointed that the federal court ruling on the constitutionality of the Georgia Government Transparency and Campaign Finance Act was overturned on entirely procedural grounds, we accept this outcome and are eager to turn the page on activities that took place more than five years ago,” the group continued. 

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Finance

Exclusive: Chris Cox on Citi’s trade finance business

Published

on

Exclusive: Chris Cox on Citi’s trade finance business

As head of trade and working capital solutions within Citi Services, Chris Cox and his team support multinational and institutional clients across core trade, supply chain finance, trade loans and export agency finance. In an exclusive interview with Euromoney, Cox sheds some light on the competitive advantage of this business and key strategic priorities.

Before leading the trade business, Cox was global head of data, digitalisation and strategic projects for securities services, so the digitisation of the trade finance space is a subject close to his heart.

We are focused on creating a thoroughly modern trade business that supports our clients as they grow internationally

Chris Cox, Citi

“For supply chain finance, we have a global platform that we integrate clients into,” he explains. “The speed at which you can onboard suppliers obviously translates directly into the speed at which you can get finance for those suppliers. So we have done a lot of work to modernise that platform, and it will roll out more extensively in the first half of next year.”

Citi

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Finance

The Biggest Finance Issues to Watch in 2025

Published

on

The Biggest Finance Issues to Watch in 2025

With a new administration in Washington and the long-expected end of federal pandemic aid, states are grappling with a new financial picture this year.

Changes to the tax code in Washington could affect revenues in states, as could increased tariffs. Medicaid is expected to be on the chopping block in Congress, to help pay for tax cuts. Serious cuts would have profound consequences for states’ bottom lines.

Still, states begin the year in pretty good financial shape. Budgets are mostly stable, with rainy-day funds remaining near record levels. A few states, however, are already seeing shortfalls — mostly blue states such as Maryland and Washington. Sales tax revenues have steadily been ticking down for months, while transportation spending has been ticking up.


Here’s a full picture of the biggest finance issues affecting states in 2025.

Budgets

After a period of rapid growth, overall state spending was flat last year. Heading into 2025, budgets are mostly in good shape, but there are several risk factors that should make lawmakers cautious. “It’ll be another year of slower spending and slower revenue growth,” says Brian Sigritz of the National Association of State Budget Officers.As has been long anticipated, extra federal aid from the pandemic era has mostly run out. State sales tax revenues have been in decline for several straight months. Expected tax and spending cuts at the federal level could have a profound effect on states, particularly if Medicaid is slashed. State and local governments receive a third of their revenues from Washington and Medicaid accounts for two-thirds of that money. “State budgets are facing significant risk with reduction of that support,” says Wesley Tharpe, a state tax expert at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a left-leaning think tank.

Advertisement

States are facing their own challenges at home. California, Maryland and Washington all face budget gaps in the billions this year and in the years to come. Although it’s mostly blue states facing big shortfalls, largely due to spending increases in recent years, red states are not immune. Some, including Iowa, Mississippi and West Virginia, enacted tax cuts that are ratcheting up with the start of the year. And the spread of school vouchers throughout Republican states is increasing costs. Half of the new spending called for in the budget proposal from Arkansas GOP Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders is devoted to vouchers.

“At first glance, most state budgets seem relatively stable, in terms of not seeing sharp declines in either revenue or spending, and rainy-day funds are sound,” Tharpe says. “Still, states are facing a set of multiple risk factors or strains.” — Alan Greenblatt

Medicaid

Medicaid has been in expansion mode in recent years, increasing payments to providers, expanding coverage and even paying, in some states, for non-medical interventions that can affect health, such as housing.

Those days are over. Medicaid is entering a new era of austerity. But just how austere is a huge, unanswerable question at this point.

As Congress considers ways to pay for tax cuts and other expenses expected in budget reconciliation bills this year, Medicaid is clearly a target. With Medicare and Social Security cuts seemingly off the table, Medicaid is the biggest remaining source of potential savings. On Capitol Hill, there’s already discussion of a variety of ways to cut Medicaid spending, including work requirements, per capita caps and lifetime limits, or converting parts of the program to block grants. “These directionally represent a future in which the Medicaid program will be attacked,” says Andrea Ducas, vice president of health policy at the Center for American Progress, a progressive think tank. “I worry about existential threats to the program.”

Advertisement

Aside from looking for savings, some conservatives object to the current imbalance in funding levels under the program. The federal government picks up 90 percent of the cost for those eligible under the Affordable Care Act (ACA), who are able-bodied adults, but less than 60 percent on average of the traditional Medicaid populations of children, adults living in poverty and nursing home residents. Medicaid is not only a strain on federal and state budgets, but delivers “substandard care” while crowding out private health insurance options, according to the conservative Heritage Foundation.

Nine states have trigger laws on the books that would end their Medicaid expansion programs if the extra spending under ACA goes away, while three more have laws in place that could ultimately have the same effect. In the 10 states that never expanded Medicaid under the ACA, the current atmosphere of likely cuts probably stops any momentum toward doing so.

Medicaid makes up an enormous share of state budgets — it’s their largest single spending item, counting federal dollars, and the second-largest expenditure of their own funds, after education. In addition to pushback from hospitals and physicians, serious Medicaid cuts will likely encounter resistance from governors worried about the enormous gap these could create both in terms of their finances and the health-care systems in their states.

So what’s going to happen? No one knows. If Medicaid is cut, it will likely be part of a second reconciliation package, centered on tax cuts, that may not pass until the end of the year — well after state budget-writing seasons are over. “We’re not going to know what could be changing in Medicaid,” says Hemi Tewarson, president of the National Academy for State Health Policy. “So states are going to have to make decisions around programs based on the facts they have before them today, which right now is uncertainty at the federal level.” — Alan Greenblatt

Insurance

Even before the fires in the Los Angeles area, insurance had emerged as a key concern for state lawmakers. More companies are pulling out of markets, leaving homeowners short on sources of protection.

Advertisement

The frequency of billion-dollar climate and weather disasters has increased nearly 250 percent in recent years. Insurers have been pulling back from disaster-prone states such as California and Florida for decades, but warmer oceans and air are causing dangerous and costly drought, rain, flood, wind and wildfire events throughout the country.

Improving resilience will be a priority following a punishing 2024, creating pressure for owner and community-based mitigation efforts. California’s new requirement that insurers offer discounts for wildfire protection is being watched by other states in the West, who want more evidence that damage will actually be reduced and claim costs go down.

New legislation in Georgia will give premium discounts to property owners who retrofit or build structures with features that help them withstand windstorms. Florida is exploring a similar strategy for condominiums. Lawmakers in Hawaii have asked the state insurance commissioner to submit a study on wildfire risk and market-based approaches to insurance before they meet in 2025.

California’s insurance commissioner believes providers will begin to come back following regulatory changes that allow insurers to set rates using catastrophe modeling that takes expected future risks into account. In exchange, they will be required to sell more policies in high-risk areas and offer safety discounts for wildfire mitigation efforts by communities and homeowners.

Since 1968, 33 states have enacted laws creating last-resort programs in which insurers share risk. Some of these state-administered, privately funded programs are in danger from recurring disasters. Federal reinsurance has been proposed for them, but might not come from an administration focused on cost cutting.

Advertisement

To keep customers and attract new ones, the National Flood Insurance Program, the largest provider of flood coverage, recently announced it would accept monthly payments as an alternative to a single yearly one. The authors of Project 2025, a governing blueprint created for the Trump administration, would like to see this taxpayer-subsidized insurance privatized. — Carl Smith

Taxes

As noted earlier, state budgets are already under considerable pressure this year. Nevertheless, there’s still a good amount of appetite for cutting taxes. But the ambitions of tax-cutters will likely be reduced from recent years, when nearly every state cut taxes.

As recently as November, Louisiana cut personal income taxes by more than $1 billion. Some governors, such as incoming Missouri Republican Mike Kehoe, are talking about eliminating income taxes altogether. Although revenues are projected to decline in Kentucky, further income tax cuts remain a priority for the legislature’s Republican majority. Last year, states including Idaho, Kansas and West Virginia passed property tax cuts. Property taxes are mostly a local matter, but states remain interested in providing relief with bills going up due to increased housing values.

All this activity comes at a time when revenue growth has slowed and significant tax legislation is expected at the federal level. President-elect Trump has proposed eliminating the $10,000 cap on state and local tax deductions imposed by the tax-cut package enacted in 2017. He wants to extend personal income tax cuts included in that bill, which would otherwise expire at the end of 2025, while offering more breaks for businesses. “That could lead to declines in corporate income tax revenues, particularly for the states that conform to the federal code,” says Lucy Dadayan of the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. “Potentially eliminating taxes on tips and Social Security can also have an impact on state tax revenues.”

Jonathan Williams, chief economist with the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council, opposes lifting the cap on state and local deductions, which he says forces the rest of the country to subsidize higher-tax jurisdictions. He favors the overall mission of extending the 2017 cuts, however. “State-level conformity with its expiring provisions, which broaden the income tax base and strengthen revenue for states, provided the ability for states to implement pro-growth tax relief in response, setting off this tax-cut revolution we’ve seen in states in recent years,” Williams says.

Advertisement

In states led by Democrats, lawmakers are considering tax hikes to help pay the bills, mostly on wealthy residents. Last month, outgoing Washington Gov. Jay Inslee prepared a budget that includes a new wealth tax to generate $10 billion over the next four years. Legislative leaders there say some sort of tax increase is likely, due to the state’s budget shortfall.

Taxes on wealth, as opposed to income, may face legal perils, but progressives around the country are still eyeing the strategy as a potential source of significant revenue. “For working people, they’re often taxed on the work that they do, and for wealthy people, they’re not very regularly taxed on the wealth that they hold,” says Jessie Ulibarri, co-executive director of the State Innovation Exchange, a consortium of progressive legislators. — Alan Greenblatt

Continue Reading

Finance

Robinhood named ‘Best Idea’ for 2025 by Bernstein team

Published

on

Robinhood named ‘Best Idea’ for 2025 by Bernstein team

Bernstein analysts named Robinhood Markets (HOOD) as the firm’s new “Best Idea” for 2025 as part of their coverage on global digital assets. Market Domination Overtime hosts Julie Hyman and Josh Lipton examine the broader analyst commentary around Robinhood’s stock.

To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination Overtime here.

This post was written by Luke Carberry Mogan.

Continue Reading

Trending