Subject: Re: Politico story on HFA state party JFAs
From: "Walker, Eric" <[email-masked]>
To: Regional Press <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2016 13:17:28 -0700

FYI here is the list of states with a JFA

Alaska
Arkansas
Colorado
Florida
Georgia
Idaho
Indiana
Kentucky
Louisiana
Maine
Massachusetts
Michigan
Minnesota
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana
Nevada
New Hampshire
North Carolina
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Pennsylvania
Rhode Island
South Carolina
Tennessee
Texas
Utah
Virginia
West Virginia
Wisconsin
Wyoming

On Apr 25, 2016, at 4:12 PM, Walker, Eric <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

Just use the tps we put togethe last week in response to sanders. Right now the states that have been asked are pa, oh, id, fl, but other requests may trickle in. Direct them to the bolded TP.

DO NOT BLAST THESE. NOT ALL STATES ARE PART OF THE JFA.

thanks fam

- For Background Only -

Talking Points on Joint Fundraising Committees

We welcome any effort by our candidates to help raise money for the DNC and state parties.
Similar agreements were set up with both the Clinton campaign and the Sanders campaign early in the cycle, precisely because of the urgency to build a strong national infrastructure now that will help elect Democrats up and down the ballot in November. The Sanders campaign has not used theirs.
It’s important to note, the funds that the DNC and state parties get through the joint victory funds help strengthen, for example, our national voter file and communications, research and digital support for state parties and down ballot candidates. That includes training across a variety of areas, for example, and access to media monitoring and rapid response support. This is helping us build infrastructure for the general election.

These arrangements are not new or unusual. Similar joint fundraising committees were established with our Democratic candidate in both 2008 and 2012. And again, both campaigns have signed on and have the option of using joint victory funds.

And let’s be clear, neither the DNC nor state parties are subsidizing fundraising through these committees for either campaign. For whatever each campaign raises under the agreement that then goes to their campaign, that campaign pays a directly proportional amount for the cost of that fundraising.
Rick Hasen, an influential academic on campaign finance, posted an analysis on the Election Law Blog that addressed this issue. Hasen states in the article that “it is hard to see what provision of the law” is at issue in the letter. As the blog points out, “legally” the criticism of the fund “seems weak.”   http://electionlawblog.org/?p=81996<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__electionlawblog.org_-3Fp-3D81996&d=CwMFAg&c=XRWvQHnpdBDRh-yzrHjqLpXuHNC_9nanQc6pPG_SpT0&r=ztfeb3sYMwYJc4m6DQzcZ1EDxKmQmE8pe5TrXm4gdCU&m=xosCmCfJlZ5AfIscnIGFPlKd_WqB4JHLY4vSLilK-IE&s=IDZd2_ULQhvZFm33gwH-mCSwcJMtMpjuFI5_FJQQvqk&e=>