Meli$$a Bean’s new diplomacy

BEAN THERE, DONE THAT - U.S. Rep. Melissa Bean met with Serbian President Boris Tadić during a 2007 trip to Belgrade. Bean has supported that government's opposition to unilateral independence for Kosovo, and has received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from those allied with Serbia's position.
U.S. Representative Melissa Bean, D-IL, abruptly moved a campaign fundraiser last week after it became public the event was being held in the home of a foreign national and raising the specter of violating federal law, the Majority Accountability Project (www.majorityap.com) has learned.

Bean scheduled a fundraiser at the home of Serbian General Counsel Desko Nikitović exactly one month after parliament in the Republic of Kosovo formally declared its independence from Serbia.

As co-chair of the Congressional Serbian Caucus, Bean, who is of Serbian descent, has long opposed unilateral independence for Kosovo.

In a 2006 letter to President George W. Bush, the Illinois Democrat wrote that the Serbian government “has demonstrated a dedication to and respect of international institutions and human rights for all,” urging that a “timely resolution to the future status of Kosovo” be “fair for both those in Kosovo and Serbia.” Bean sponsored a Congressional resolution the following year, opposing U.S. support of “unilateral action toward Kosovo's independence.”

But the Serbian government has made clear that an independent Kosovo is vigorously opposed by their government, raising doubts about Bean’s proposal for a negotiated settlement.

“We shall never recognize Kosovo's independence,” Serbian Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic told the United Nations before Kosovo had declared its independence. “Not now. Not in a year. Not in a decade. Never.”

The independent Serbian news agency B92 reported that Bean met with Jermic, along with Serbian President Boris Tadić and Prime Minister Vojislav Koštunica during a 2007 visit to Belgrade.

After Kosovo declared its independence on March 17, 2008, the UN accused the Serbian government of orchestrating violent clashes in Kosovo in “which a Ukrainian policeman was killed and dozens of other officers were wounded.”

President Bush has formally recognized Kosovo’s independence, as have France, Great Britain, Germany, Canada, Serbia’s neighbors Bulgaria, Croatia and Hungary, and more than two dozen other nations. The strongest support of Serbia’s effort to retain control of Kosovo has come from Russia.

While Bean’s tacit support of the Serbian government has put her at odds with official U.S. policy, it has been a boon to her campaign fundraising.

According to her 2008 opponent, Illinois businessman Steve Greenberg, Bean has received more than $24,000 in campaign contributions from members of the Serbian Unity Congress, “a non-profit international organization…committed to ensuring the continuation of the Serbian heritage.”

On its website, the group “strongly denounces Kosovo’s unilateral declaration of independence as well as America’s subsequent recognition of it.”

It was Greenberg who first provided public details of Bean’s fundraiser at the home of the Serbian General Counsel. Bean countered that the event was being hosted by Nikitović’s wife, an American citizen and head of the Serbian Bar Association of America.

But Federal law prohibits foreign nationals “from contributing, donating or spending funds in connection with any federal, state, or local election in the United States, either directly or indirectly.” Since Nikitović shares the home with his wife, Bean would have likely faced violations of that law.

Bean subsequently moved the event to a local restaurant.


No legal problem with foreign citizen's hosting home fundraiser

Perhaps I'm mistaken, but I don't see how federal law would bar the fundraiser, even if Nikitovic's wife weren't a U.S. citizen. 2 U.S.C. sec. 441e does bar foreign nationals from making "a contribution or donation of money or other thing of value" to a candidate. But sec. 431(8)(B)(ii) expressly says that "The term 'contribution' does not include .... the use of real or personal property ... voluntarily provided by an individual to any candidate or any political committee of a political party in rendering voluntary personal services on the individual's residential premises"; this also includes up to $1000 worth of incidental "invitations, food, and beverages." I checked with some people who know more about election law than I do, and they echo this; and my sense from my exchange with them is that the phrase "or donation" in sec. 441e doesn't broaden the concept to cover that which the definition of "contribution" in sec. 431(8)(B)(ii) explicitly excludes. It may have been politically wise for Rep. Bean to move the fundraiser, but based on the account above I don't see any legal obligation for her to do so. (I should note that I'm entirely unaffiliated with any parties involved, and in fact had never heard of Rep. Bean until a reader pointed me to this article). Eugene Volokh Professor of Law UCLA School of Law Blogger, The Volokh Conspiracy, http://volokh.com

Coulda, woulda, shoulda

The fact that Rep. Bean moved her fundraiser says everything there is to say.  If you're going to contradict official U.S. policy, don't raise money from the foreign government your position benefits.

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <object> <param>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
More information about formatting options