NRA Accused of “Elaborate Scheme” to Evade Campaign Finance Law

A watchdog group alleges the gun lobby has secretly coordinated political spending with GOP Senate candidate Josh Hawley.

NRA leader Wayne LaPierre taking the stage at the group's annual convention in Dallas in May 2018Justin Sullivan/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

A new complaint filed with the Federal Election Commission accuses the National Rifle Association and GOP Missouri Senate candidate Josh Hawley of engaging in “an elaborate scheme designed to evade detection” of campaign finance violations.

The complaint from the Campaign Legal Center, a nonpartisan watchdog, and Giffords, a gun violence prevention group, raises questions about whether GOP campaign contractors and vendors are facilitating hidden coordination between campaigns and the outside groups who support them. The complaint is the third in four months to accuse the NRA of appearing to use a shell company to circumvent laws against such coordination.

The complaints are based in part on an ongoing investigation by the Trace showing that the NRA’s exclusive political advertising consultant, Starboard Strategic, may be functioning as a front for the prominent conservative political consulting firm OnMessage Inc. (Mother Jones and the Trace have teamed up to further investigate the NRA’s finances and political activity.) Starboard Strategic has received more than $60 million from the NRA since 2013.

Corporate records show that OnMessage and Starboard share the same offices and leadership. The Trace has documented six Senate races in which a Republican candidate hired OnMessage while, in the same cycle, the NRA paid Starboard for ads in support of the same candidate. In 2014, those candidates included Thom Tillis in North Carolina, Cory Gardner in Colorado, and Tom Cotton in Arkansas. Two years later, the arrangement occurred in Wisconsin, with Sen. Ron Johnson. And now it is playing out again, this time in Missouri with Hawley and in Montana with GOP candidate Matt Rosendale.

When campaigns and outside groups use a common vendor, the FEC requires the firm in the middle to establish a strict “firewall” preventing executives and staffers working for either client from sharing information. Starboard’s status as a separate legal entity gives the appearance that the NRA is using a different vendor from the campaigns it supports, even though, according to the Campaign Legal Center, Starboard seems to be “functionally indistinguishable” from OnMessage. Both OnMessage and Starboard have repeatedly declined to disclose details of any such firewall policy.

So far this cycle, the NRA has placed nearly $1 million in ads through Starboard supporting Hawley over Missouri’s Democratic incumbent, Sen. Claire McCaskill. Hawley, meanwhile, has paid OnMessage more than $2 million for its consulting services.

The NRA, the Hawley campaign, OnMessage, and Starboard did not respond to requests for comment.

The latest FEC complaint also alleges a new avenue of potentially illegal coordination: According to Federal Communications Commission records, the complaint says, the NRA is also placing ads in Missouri through Red Eagle Media, which is a “trade name” for a well-known media consultant called National Media Research, Planning, and Placement. At the same time, FCC records show, the Hawley campaign has paid an affiliate of National Media Research, called American Media and Advocacy Group, LLC, for ad buys.

“In at least one instance,” the complaint says, “the same National Media official”—signing documents under Red Eagle for one client, and under American Media for the other—“placed advertisements on behalf of the NRA [Political Victory Fund] and Josh Hawley for Senate at the same station on the same day.”

National Media Research is housed in the same Alexandria, Virginia, office building as Starboard and OnMessage. It did not respond to a request for comment.

The complaint comes a week after nine senators called on the FEC to investigate the NRA’s arrangement with Starboard Strategic, asserting that it is “highly likely” the company has been used for the purpose of “sharing proprietary information.”

Clarification: This story has been updated to reflect Hawley’s most recent payments to OnMessage, which are not yet reflected in the Federal Election Commission’s searchable database.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate