Bank documents for a
controversial conservative social welfare nonprofit released Friday by Montana
officials contradict assertions by a former top official of the group.
The records show Allison LeFer signed many of the checks paid out by Western
Tradition Partnership, or WTP, from April 2008 to October 2010.
LeFer also operates a printing business that did work for
political candidates, but her husband, Christian LeFer,
a key player in WTP between 2008 and 2010, has maintained that the couple kept
her work and his strictly separate.
The bank records appear to
contradict this, however, indicating Allison LeFer
was involved with WTP. Separate records from candidates show they paid her
printing company for work.
Outside groups like WTP are
not allowed to coordinate with candidates, largely because contributions to
candidates are subject to strict limits. Outside groups can take unlimited
amounts of money.
Attempts to get a hold of
Christian and Allison LeFer were unsuccessful Friday
night.
Earlier
this week, in response to questions about other documents that had surfaced on
the group’s activities, Christian LeFer said, “Both my wife and I have scrupulously endeavored to
avoid any possibility of illegal coordination.”
ProPublica and Frontline have
written extensively
about how boxes of documents found in a meth house in Colorado and sent to
Montana authorities pointed toward possible coordination between candidates and
outside spending groups, including WTP. The group was a focus of a Frontline
film broadcast earlier this
week.
The boxes contained files for
23 candidates for state office in Montana. They also held fliers and
questionnaires from outside spending groups. One group, WTP, seemed to be
pulling the strings, working with campaigns on strategy and surveys.
Although small, WTP has won national attention for its attempts
to fight campaign-finance restrictions. Its lawsuit overturned Montana’s
ban
on corporate spending in elections, extending the U.S. Supreme Court’s Citizens
United decision to all states.
The
group also has been engaged in a long-running dispute with Montana
campaign-finance regulators. It has sued Montana over its ruling two years
ago
that WTP was acting as a political committee and should have to report its
donors. That lawsuit will be heard in March.
Documents available for WTP, now known as the American Tradition
Partnership, provide a rare look into the inner workings of a so-called dark
money group. These tax-exempt organizations can accept unlimited contributions
and do not have to disclose their donors. ProPublica has written extensively about such
groups, which are playing a growing role in federal and state elections.
In
addition to the documents found in the meth house in Colorado, in early 2010, Montana regulators also were provided with others by a woman who
briefly worked at WTP.
Now
Montana District Court Judge Jeffrey Sherlock has ordered the release of
hundreds of pages of account transactions and copies of checks to consultants
and vendors in Montana, Colorado and near Washington, D.C.
The records showed that checks
written on WTP’s account and signed by Allison LeFer
went to gun shows, for legal work and to LeFer’s
printing company. She also signed a check for the group’s largest expenditure,
a one-time transfer on Nov. 23, 2010, for $40,000 to “WTI.” This could refer to
the Western Tradition Institute, the sister charity of WTP.
WTP
had sought a protective injunction against the records’ release, sought by
Frontline and ProPublica. Sherlock wrote in his ruling that there is a
“substantial relation between disclosure of this financial information and
Montana’s stated constitutional interest in its citizen’s right to know.”
Montana
officials released some of the bank information late Friday and will release
the remainder after redacting account information.
On
its website, American Tradition
Partnership,
formerly WTP, describes itself as a grassroots lobbying organization fighting
against radical environmentalists. It says it hasn’t engaged in politics or
advocated for or against the election of candidates. Instead, it says it simply
educates voters on how candidates stand on
issues.
