COINCIDENCE?: Lawsuit could lead to earlier fund-raising start for gubernatorial candidate Tim Griffin.

The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette reported this morning on a lawsuit challenging the state law that prohibits fund-raising for a political campaign more than two years before an election. So, how about some more details on who’s behind it?

The article describes the plaintiff, Peggy Jones, as a “longtime political activist.”

What type of political activist?

Well, the Open Secrets website shows a Peggy Jones of Little Rock as a  former campaign contributor  ($500) of Tim Griffin, the former congressman and current lieutenant governor.

Advertisement

Peggy Jones of Little Rock is also an officer of a PAC, the Pulaski County Republican Women.

Or perhaps it’s this Peggy Jones, in a photo with, as she puts it on Facebook, “two good conservatives,” Tim Griffin and Marsha Blackburn.

Plaintiff Peggy Jones doesn’t want to have to wait until May 2020 to start writing checks. Republicans think money is speech and they want to distribute it freely. (Carried to a logical extreme, why have any sort of limits on campaign spending at all?)

Anyway, the filing of this lawsuit reminds me that Tim Griffin was overheard recently talking on the phone with GOP Chair Doyle Webb about just such a legal challenge recently while working out at a local gym. A spokesman for Griffin denied any such a thing happened when I inquired. And, OK, Webb was overheard talking to a “Doyle” about a lawsuit over the two-year window on campaign contributions, but maybe it was another Doyle.

Anyway, now a federal lawsuit has been filed. Coincidence, I guess.

Griffin is already running hard for governor in 2022, with a steady round of public appearances. But it would be so much better if he could start building a war chest now for an anticipated heavyweight match with a candidate likely to be favored by Donald Trump, Attorney General Leslie Rutledge. Somebody’s gotta lose.

Here’s the lawsuit.

Advertisement

PS: Defendants include the state Ethics Commission and it challenges a state law. Wonder if the attorney general will vigorously defend that law?