- Ted Cruz is in hot water with his thrice-weekly “Verdict” podcast.
- He was accused of violating the law by directing advertising revenue from the podcast to a super PAC.
- In a departure from his usual approach, he refused to answer questions on the matter in depth.
When I approached Sen. Ted Cruz at the Capitol this week, he seemed upbeat, joking that he was “living the dream” when I opened our conversation.
The Texas Republican, however, quickly became combative when I told him I had questions about a strange story that began bubbling up in recent weeks about his thrice-weekly podcast “Verdict” and a super PAC set up for the sole purpose of supporting his re-election. .
“Of course I do,” Cruz replied. “I understand that you are tasked with writing an attack article.”
This was similar to the approach he took when asked about the controversy by a local television station in Houston, where he refused to address the subject substantively and instead accused a reporter of trying to “repeat the attacks of left-wing Democrats”.
This all started in late March when the Houston Chronicle reported that iHeartMedia — the company that hosts Cruz’s podcast — had since early 2023 deposited more than $630,000 into “Truth and Courage,” a super PAC created to support re-election of Cruz.
iHeartMedia, which signed on as a corporate partner of the podcast in late 2022, confirmed that payments to the super PAC came from advertising revenue generated by the podcast.
However, campaign finance laws prohibit direct coordination between candidates and the super PACs that support them, and the payments raise the possibility that Cruz has struck some sort of deal with iHeartMedia to direct advertising revenue to the super PAC – an apparent violation of these laws.
When I asked Cruz if that was the case, he said his team had already released a statement on the matter — although the only such statement I could find was the one given to the Houston Chronicle, which accused the media of wanting to “shut down” his podcast while noting that he makes the appearances “for free.”
Cruz is usually eager to talk about both his podcast and campaign finance laws.
In some ways, it’s not hard to understand why Cruz is agitated: The brewing scandal is creating negative press as he faces a competitive re-election race against Democratic Rep. Colin Allred next November.
The Campaign Legal Center and End Citizens United also filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission accusing Cruz of violating campaign finance laws.
BP America, an oil company, asked iHeartMedia to remove its ads from the podcast, saying it “was never informed” that its ad dollars were “going directly to a super PAC.”
Still, Cruz’s refusal to answer questions about the deal is a departure from his usual approach.
When Allred first tried to criticize Cruz’s podcast for potentially distracting the senator from his responsibilities, the Texas senator confidently told me that his podcast was in fact “integral part of the job,” even if it “takes quite a bit of time.” Cruz is also known for asking reporters on Capitol Hill to listen to his podcast in order to get a more complete sense of his views on various topics.
He also discussed campaign finance issues with me, explaining his opposition to a bill to disclose dark money spending in federal elections and speaking at length with me about his eponymous Supreme Court case.
In this case, Ted Cruz v. FEC, the Texas senator deliberately challenged existing campaign finance laws, suing the FEC in an attempt to get the conservative Supreme Court to eliminate the existing $250,000 cap on the amount of money a candidate can raise after his term in office. elections to repay personal loans granted to their campaign.
The cap was intended as an anti-corruption measure, limiting the ability of donors to line lawmakers’ personal pockets.
Cruz made a relatively simple argument to me in May 2023 about why he disagreed with this, arguing that the cap was really an effort to “disincentivize any challenger from taking the risk and lending his own money to his campaign.
I’ve since written about some of the fallout from that June 2022 Supreme Court decision, including Cruz and Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin repaying themselves for years-old campaign loans and Sen. J.D. Vance of Ohio and Markwayne Mullin of Oklahoma doing it all as they accepted corporate contributions to the PAC.
So when I contacted Cruz this week, I asked him if he might do something similar here to what he had done before: challenge existing campaign finance law with the intent of to modify. And I hoped he would be willing to explain his intentions, as he has done in the past.
“When you write a positive story about something I accomplished here, about legislation I passed, then I will answer your questions,” Cruz responded. “In the meantime, if you just want to make attacking plays, knock yourself out.”
businessinsider
