Why It Matters
The complaint asks Rhode Island elections officials to examine whether campaign finance reports and advertising payments complied with state rules governing publicly matched funds. The allegations remain unproven, and John Loughlin denied them.
What Happened
Sabina Matos’ campaign filed a complaint Thursday against Loughlin with the Rhode Island Board of Elections. The filing alleged that Loughlin’s campaign manager, Chris Mueller, improperly reported campaign activity and benefited from taxpayer-funded campaign money.
Loughlin’s initial spending report, filed by the Oct. 27 deadline, listed $659 in expenses. His campaign amended the report twice the following morning, with each version listing $3,641 in expenses.
After the complaint was filed, Loughlin amended the report a third time. That filing listed $58,651 in expenditures for the reporting period ending Oct. 26, including television and radio advertising.
The Rhode Island Board of Elections imposed a $25 late fee. Christopher Hunter did not confirm or deny Friday whether the board had opened an investigation.
Campaign finance investigations remain confidential until officials believe a violation has occurred. The person under investigation may waive that confidentiality.
The complaint accused Mueller of receiving a financial benefit from publicly matched campaign funds. Mark Gray alleged that Mueller used his advertising business to collect commissions on Loughlin campaign television advertisements.
Federal Communications Commission forms identified Chris Mueller Campaigns as the buying agency for the television advertisements and cited a 15% agency commission. Gray also alleged that Mueller’s business and Loughlin’s campaign headquarters share an address and that Mueller completed advertising agreements for radio and television orders.
Rhode Island’s public matching funds program permits certain campaign expenses, including radio and television advertising. Loughlin said his campaign was charged gross rates by television stations and directed the stations to reinvest available commission refunds in additional advertising.
Gray said discrepancies remained between Loughlin’s campaign reports and FCC records. His complaint asked the elections board to review the Oct. 27 report and impose penalties if warranted.
By the Numbers
Tuesday — date of the general election
Thursday — date Matos’ campaign filed its complaint
Friday — date Loughlin shared his letter and Hunter discussed the investigation status
Oct. 27 — deadline and date of Loughlin’s original campaign spending report
$659 — expenses listed in Loughlin’s initial report
$3,641 — expenses in each of the first two amended reports
$58,651 — expenditures listed in the third amendment
$55,010 — total of newly added expenses
$25,000 — television expenditure for WJAR
$25,000 — television expenditure for WPRI
$5,010 — radio advertising expenditure
$25 — late fee imposed by the Rhode Island Board of Elections
$500 — material-amendment dollar threshold
10% — material-amendment percentage threshold
$80,000 — matching public funds Gray said were omitted from the original report
$3000 — campaign payments Gray said were omitted from the original report
15% — agency commission cited on FCC forms
$58,605 — television orders identified in FCC filings
$28,375 — television orders at WPRI
$26,600 — television orders at WJAR
$3,630 — television orders at WNAC
$9,790 — radio spots purchased on WPRO
$68,395 — total television and radio orders identified
Oct. 20 — date of the Pell Center poll
44% — likely voters supporting Loughlin in the poll
43% — likely voters supporting Matos in the poll
Zoom Out
A Salve Regina University Pell Center poll dated Oct. 20 found the lieutenant governor’s race statistically tied, with 44% of likely voters supporting Loughlin and 43% supporting Matos.
The campaign finance dispute involves both state reporting requirements and FCC records for political advertising. The complaint specifically asks officials to compare those records and determine whether the reported figures and payments complied with Rhode Island rules.
What’s Next
The Rhode Island Board of Elections must determine whether to review the complaint and whether any reported discrepancies warrant penalties. The board has not said whether an investigation has begun.