Newspaper asks, "Who is Howard Rich?"

A month ago, after Howie Rich appeared in a YouTube interview with South Carolina's Republican Party chairman, the Spartanburg Herald-Journal published an article that asked in its headline, "Who is Howard Rich?" It gave a simple answer to its own question: "He's one of the most popular figures in South Carolina politics. He's also one of the most despised."

What makes him popular and despised at the same time, the Herald said, was "his willingness to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars - in his own name, through a network of LLCs, through like-minded associates and through groups such as South Carolinians for Responsible Government, Conservatives in Action and the S.C. Club for Growth - in an effort to create a Legislature in his image."

It has made Rich "a political superstar," the paper said.

The issues he pushes make him public enemy No. 1 for some members of both parties. Causing the most heartburn is his desire to create a private school system funded by taxpayer dollars. But Rich's fan club includes some of South Carolina's top-ranking Republicans. State Republican Party Chairman Katon Dawson fawned over him in a soft-hitting interview that was broadcast over the Internet. Spartanburg County GOP Chairman Rick Beltram wants to worship at his feet, or at least his hip pocket.

Leading the "Get Rich, Quick" club are top Democrats and public education supporters. Spartanburg County Democratic Party Chairman Glenn Lindman calls him a "disaster waiting to happen." State Rep. Mike Anthony, D-Union, the public information officer for Union County Schools, says Rich is pouring money into candidates who are willing to "sell their souls" to get elected.

The local Republican Party chairman, Rick Beltram, told the paper that when South Carolina elected Mark Sanford its governor, it opened the door to Howie Rich, since both have "strong libertarian leanings."

Rich "sailed under the radar for a time," the paper said. He gave thousands of dollars in contributions to candidates and committees through several companies that he owns in New York. His activity was discovered when someone found the same address attached to many different entities popping up on campaign disclosure forms. He used this system in 2006 to funnel more than $51,000 to the pro-voucher Republican candidate for superintendent of education. She was narrowly defeated.

This spring, the paper said, "he pumped at least $500,000 into primary races across the state - including six in Spartanburg County." In some cases, Rich gave the money directly to candidates, but in other cases he contributed to a group called South Carolinians for Responsible Government and the South Carolina Club for Growth. Those groups then paid for television ads and mail flyers.

No one knows how much money Howie Rich contributed to those front groups because "SCRG is not required to report where its funding comes from or where it spends its money because it is an 'advocacy group'."

Bob Walker, the veteran lawmaker from Landrum who had become chairman of the House Education Committee, was one of Howie Rich's targets.

While [Lee] Bright got the most money locally, Joey Millwood scored the biggest victory. Millwood unseated Rep. Bob Walker, the chairman of the House Education and Public Works Committee. Millwood collected at least $50,000 from Rich and his associates, and also benefited from "advocacy" mailings by SCRG and Conservatives in Action.

Who is Howard Rich?

The local Democratic Party chairman predicted a quid pro quo relationship behind Howie Rich's contributions. "If Rich spent that much money to buy a seat, he says, he's going to expect something in return," he paper said.

"If you're that beholden to that man for that amount of money, you're representing his interests," Lindman said. "And his agenda is in conflict with what's in the best interest of Spartanburg County and the state."

It looks like Lindman is right. Both Bright and Millwood, the two candidates who won with Rich's funding, support Rich's school voucher plan.

Bright said he would support a voucher plan for students in failing schools. Millwood, like Rich, said he favors a tax credit. When asked how low-income students would benefit from a tax credit plan, Millwood said, "I'll have to get back to you." He said there were "a lot of student grant organizations out there," but when asked where they were he said he didn't know and that he'd never looked into it.

The Herald found another troubling pattern in Howie Rich's political activism:

Most of Rich's money showed up in the "dark period" between the date candidates had to file pre-election disclosures and the time voters went to the polls. That prevented voters from knowing who was receiving his funding, and how much they were getting. Rich said he wasn't trying to hide anything.

"I made donations based on when the support would have the most impact," Rich said. "No other reason."

The paper said that school vouchers are only one of Howie Rich's favorite issues. He has also poured money into state ballot initiatives for "spending limits, based on a formula of inflation plus population growth, and private property rights - particularly regulatory takings legislation."

But the Herald didn't name which states have been Rich's targets for political activity. It did say that Rich has accused opponents of his ideas and his contributions deceitful.

While Rich claims deceit on the part of opponents, it's his initiatives that have run into trouble with the law. In 2006 in Montana, for example, a district judge threw out ballot measures to cap state spending, enact a takings law and to make it easier to recall judges because of fraud by out-of-state, paid signature-gatherers, the newspaper The Missoulian reported. The state supreme court upheld the ruling.

The paper also added this warning to the voters of South Carolina who hope this sort of politics is temporary:

In his interview with Dawson, Rich said that he and his groups "weren't going anywhere."

Petitioner tries to oppose Howie Rich's candidate

For a short time, it appeared that Howie Rich's candidate in the South Carolina House race might have an independent opponent, and Howie Rich was the reason.

Former Landrum Mayor Doug Brannon has about 24 hours to finish collecting enough signatures to be on the November ballot as a candidate for the state House of Representatives. "The residents of House District 38 need a strong, vocal representative that isn't pulled by out-of-state money or some other power," Brannon said.

According to his pre-election campaign disclosure form, Millwood received about three-quarters of the money he had raised so far - $4,150 - from New York donors affiliated with Libertarian Howard Rich. Rich and his associates have supported groups and individuals in South Carolina promoting school choice, specifically vouchers, though Millwood said he would prefer tax credits for parents who send their children to private school over a voucher system.

Millwood had not filed his second-quarter disclosure statement as of Sunday. But he said he would continue working hard toward November as he did the months leading up to the June primary.
...
Brannon said he would not accept contributions from out-of-state special interests.

Brannon pushing petition deadline to join House District 38 race
Herald-Journal (Spartanburg, SC) - July 14, 2008

Millwood's response to the potential challenge from Brannon was expected: "I'm the Republican nominee," he said.

Another hurdle Brannon faces is the funding machine built by New York Libertarian Howard Rich. As of May 23 - the deadline for candidates to file their pre-election campaign disclosure forms with the state - Millwood had raised only $3,650 this quarter, and $3,000 of that was from associates of Rich.

Since then, Millwood received an additional $47,427.18 in campaign donations. Of that, $45,600, or more than 96 percent, came from individuals and entities affiliated with Rich and the S.C. Club for Growth - and about half of that came May 24, the beginning of the window when candidates would not have to disclose donors until after the election.
...
None of that financial information includes the thousands of dollars pumped into the House District 38 primary by South Carolinians for Responsible Government, or SCRG, and Conservatives in Action, in the form of campaign literature. The money trail for those groups also leads back to Rich, and the groups have successfully navigated loopholes in state law by calling campaign mailers "education pieces."
...
Whether tax dollars should be used to support private school education will be a key issue in this race. It's an issue championed by Rich and his groups, and ousting Walker was seen as a victory for those who support using tax dollars to help cover costs for parents who send their children to private schools.

Brannon turns in petitions - House District 38: If signatures check out, he'll appear on Nov. 4 ballot
Herald-Journal (Spartanburg, SC) - July 16, 2008

But Brannon's petition effort fell short, leaving Howie Rich's candidate to run against an unknown Democrat in the general election.

Rich measure would ban public campaign financing

Today, Dick Randolph of Alaska is 72 years old. Like Bob Walker of South Carolina, Randolph is an insurance salesman. Like Bob, Randolph is a former member of his state legislature. But as Bob's legislative service comes to an end, Randolph has come back into the public eye because of his leadership on an Alaska ballot initiative. He was asked to take on the job by "his old friend, New York land developer Howie Rich," according to the Anchorage Daily News in January 2008.

The ballot measure is called the "Anti-Corruption Act," and Randolph describes it this way: "The basic gist is to, you know, stop the use of government money to lobby for more government money."

The Daily News wrote in January that there's more to the measure than just that, and that the Rich-Randolph act is the opposite of a "Clean Elections Initiative" on the same ballot. It writes, "

They both have such great names: "The Clean Elections Act." "The Anti-Corruption Act." Who wouldn't want that? But voters may find they can choose only one of the dueling ballot initiatives that are circulating.

The Clean Elections effort is a push to allow candidates for state office to opt for publicly funded campaigns -- if they agree to give up private donations. The Anti-Corruption initiative would make it a crime for someone who hires a politician fresh out of office to get a government contract, ban government contractors from giving donations -- and ban any public money for campaigns. In other words, one initiative could cancel the other out. Initiatives are a way for voters to make laws without the Legislature.

And in January, people working in support of the Clean Election Act complained that those promoting the Anti-Corruption Act were telling voters that the measures were the same, in order to collect their signatures on petitions.

Scott Kohlhaas, a Libertarian working on the Anti-Corruption team, called the complaint frivolous. His signature gatherers are trained to draw a distinction between the two initiatives, he said. Kohlhaas sat in a suit and tie in a mostly empty office on Sixth Avenue Tuesday. A map of Anchorage political districts and a whiteboard with his group's signature-gathering goals written in marker, hung on the wall.

As Kohlhaas talked, a petition gatherer called looking for his money -- $1 per signature. Backers of both initiatives pay people to collect the nearly 24,000 names they need to put their proposal on a statewide ballot.

When it learned from Kohlhaas and Dick Randolph that Randolph's friend Howie Rich was behind the measure, the Daily News sent an email to Rich asking for an interview, but Rich did not respond. They asked Kohlhaas and others for more information about Rich's participation.

When asked about Rich's role in the Alaska initiative, Kohlhaas said: "I can tell you he sent me an e-mail telling me not to 'eff' this up."

Bob Adney, director of the Anti-Corruption Act committee, said Rich has not given any money to the effort. If the group's proposal gets on the 2010 ballot, it will ask Rich for funding, Adney said. So far, his committee has raised about $75,000, Adney said. But he won't say specifically who gave the money.

Groups trying to get an initiative on the ballot don't have to report where they get they get their money until the initiative makes it to the ballot and the groups start to campaign, said Chris Ellingson, assistant director of the Alaska Public Offices Commission. Alaskans for Clean Elections, which wants public money in campaigns, is voluntarily reporting its funding sources.

When it compared the two ballot measures, the Daily News drew these conclusions:

CLEAN ELECTION INITIATIVE
Meant to reduce the influence of special interests and wealthy donors, it would let candidates for state office opt for a publicly funded campaign.

Candidates who agree to forgo private donations -- and are able to get a minimum number of $5 donations to show they have a solid base of support -- would get a limited amount of state money to run for office.

ANTI-CORRUPTION ACT
Supporters describe it as a way to curb influence peddling between politicians and the people, companies and groups who do business with the state. It also proposes a ban on using public money for campaigns, lobbying or any partisan purpose.

The proposal would put restrictions on anyone who has a government contract. For example, government contractors couldn't hire a politician or staffer who left office within the previous two years.

"Clean elections, anti-corruption initiatives aren't the same critter - 1 seeks, 1 bans public campaign money"
Anchorage Daily News (AK) - January 9, 2008

New Yorker has history in Alaska, too

The Howie Rich who was mentioned by Cindi Ross Scoppe in The State on May 13 was mentioned also by a reporter in Alaska's Anchorage Daily News last winter, on January 9, more than a week before Joey Millwood's public forum on immigration in Landrum. A former Alaska state representative named Dick Randolph told the Daily News that he was "contacted by an associate of his old friend, New York land developer Howie Rich" about leading a ballot initiative campaign there.

On January 20, a writer in the Juneau Empire explained the initiative and the relationship between Randolph and Rich:

For example, two initiatives before us are the Clean Elections Initiative and the Anti-Corruption Act. On the surface, both initiatives appear to be like-minded efforts, but in reality they are diametrically opposed. Clean Elections proposes greater public funding/participation in future elections while the anti-corruption effort clearly prohibits this objective. Even more disconcerting are allegations that the anti-corruption folks are claiming their effort is a substitute for the Clean Elections Initiative. If so, it is clearly not. But the bigger issue lies in the existing disclosure rules. The sponsors of the Clean Elections Initiative have voluntarily disclosed their funding sources, while the anti-corruption campaign folks will not - their right under existing law until the initiative is certified.

What is known is that the anti-corruption campaign has at least indirect ties to Howard Rich, a New York real estate developer. This tie stems from former state Rep. Dick Randolph, who has lent his name to the anti-corruption effort. Both men are friends and devoted libertarians. Unfortunately, Rich is infamous for funding stealth citizen initiatives in other Western states. Nearly all have failed, but more importantly, some have been thrown out by the courts due to "persuasive patterns of wrong doing and fraud."

While there is no proof of wrong doing in Alaska, we cannot afford to be blindsided again. Full disclosure of the funding behind initiatives from the get-go would go a long way in letting citizens decide whether proposed initiatives can pass the common "smell" test.

And, back in the original Anchorage Daily News article, Randolph confirmed part of that information.

Randolph said he knew Rich as a prominent member of the national Libertarian Party. Today, Rich is better known for his controversial role in quietly paying for initiative efforts in Western states, according to a series of news reports over the past two years.

"Clean elections, anti-corruption initiatives aren't the same critter - 1 seeks, 1 bans public campaign money"
Anchorage Daily News (AK) - January 9, 2008

An author named Melinda Pillsbury-Foster knows more about their relationship. In the late 1970s, she writes,

in Alaska, a state with a population of only one million and an unusual set of circumstances due to the Alaska Pipe Line things had been developing. They continued to develop, but in very different directions. Several people had been elected to the state legislature as Libertarians. No matter what the size of the legislative body this was a major accomplishment.

It began with a guy named Dick Randolph, who had served two terms as a Republican state legislator in 1974 and 1974. After that he dropped out and did some thinking. Then he ran again, but this time as a Libertarian, in 1980 and then in 1982. This caused an explosion of popularity for Libertarianism in the Far North. Dick was the kind of guy who was well liked and thought of in his community. Dick encouraged another Libertarian, Ken Fanning, to run in his district in 1982 and Fanning squeaked in, too. Then Randolph decided to run for governor as a Libertarian in 1984. He lost, naturally. But Alaskans were happy that Randolph had managed to rescind the state income tax. It looked like anything was possible.

Another writer named Murray Rothbard was editor of the Libertarian Forum, the monthly newsletter of the Libertarian Party in the 1980s. Rothbard explained the relationship between Howie Rich and Dick Randolph in February 1983, when he listed several Libertarian Party activists who had created their own organization within the party. Rothbard called this organization the "Crane Machine," named for its leader, Ed Crane.

Rothbard wrote that Howie Rich "ran the disastrous Guida campaign for national chair in 1981, the equally disastrous Randolph campaign in 1982, and the likewise disastrous Northrup for Governor campaign in New York in 1982."

Of Randolph, Rothbard wrote, "A special category for the straw boss of the Alaska LP. Formerly State Rep, ran disastrous campaign for Governor in 1982. Turned his entire campaign over to the Crane Machine. One has the feeling, however, that Dick could someday leave the Machine. Is rumored to be suffering from revolt within Alaska LP."

Rothbard's notes say that a man named Kent Guida, a former businessman from Maryland, "ran the calamitous Randolph campaign under Rich's supervision." Another Libertarian, Eric O'Keefe, had been the national director of the Libertarian Party, but "when ousted, went to Alaska to help Guida run the Randolph fiasco."

Rothbard ties all of these men together under the leadership of Ed Crane, and he describes Crane this way:

The Big Boss: capo di tutti capi. Main power base: Head of the Cato Institute, which moved from San Franciso to Washington, D.C. early in the Reagan Administration to be close to the Corridors of Power. Also, Boss of: Libertarian Review Foundation, and its publications Inquiry and Update; National Taxpayers Legal Fund; and the Crane Machine in the Libertarian Party. Formerly, boss of Students for a Libertarian Society, and formerly, National Chairman of the LP. Managed the LP presidential campaigns in 1976 and 1980.