In the News
Washington Times: Self-financing candidates can’t buy love; wealthy challengers rarely win the elections
By Luke RosiakBut having the wealth to get out of that doesn’t always translate into political charisma, and may actually be a disadvantage for candidates who need to connect with average voters.“You don’t know how a business guy is going to come across; they may not actually be well-suited for politics,” said David Keating, president of the Center for Competitive Politics. He said the wealthy can even have added baggage from their businesses that their opponents can use against them, not to mention that their wealth makes it harder for voters to relate to them.
Independent Groups
Free Beacon: Pervasive Political Targeting
By Lachlan MarkayThe IRS, witnesses said, applied additional scrutiny even to 501(c)(3) charities, which by their nature are less political than (c)(4) advocacy groups, whose donations are not tax deductible.“Unlike many of the other groups facing similar harassment from the IRS, Linchpins of Liberty is seeking 501(c)(3)—as opposed to 501(c)(4)—status, and we do not use the words ‘tea party’ or ‘patriot’ in our application,” Kookogey testified.“We do, however, share one common trait with most of those groups: Our ideas,” Kookogey said.
Daily Caller: Liberal campaign finance reform activist linked to IRS commissioner had meetings with Obama
By Patrick HowleyNick Nyhart, the CEO of a liberal organization that criticizes corporate campaign spending and employs the wife of former IRS commissioner Douglas Shulman, visited the White House seven times and had two visits with President Obama around the time that the Internal Revenue Service was targeting conservative groups for extra scrutiny.Nyhart, the president and CEO of Public Campaign, appears on the White House visitor logs seven times between September 16, 2009 and September 22, 2010.
Washington Post: Five and counting: Yet another IRS hearing
By Josh HicksA representative from one of the targeted groups said the review process was “pretty much a proctology exam through your earlobe,” while others complained that their applications had been lost or that the IRS demanded names of board members, copies of meeting minutes and résumés, among other detailed information.The constant hearings are likely to be taking a toll on morale within the IRS community, particularly among the rank-and-file employees and managers in the agency’s tax-exemption division, who have been blamed for lack of oversight and proper management in the affair.“The constant hammering the IRS is taking right now will be detrimental for those who are doing a good job,” said Max Stier, president of the Partnership for Public Service. “It’s demoralizing for the whole system.”
Free Beacon: Busted Union
By Bill McMorrisOne of the Democratic Party’s largest political contributors must pay a former employee who was fired from his job because he refused to donate to a union political action committee (PAC).The Laborers International Union of North America (LIUNA) and Penn Line Service agreed to pay a West Virginia man $10,000, acknowledging that he was wrongfully terminated from his job after refusing to make the political donations.“Bulldozing someone into contributing to a union PAC that violates their sincerely-held beliefs is unconscionable,” said Mark Mix, president of the National Right to Work Committee. “No worker should ever be forced to pay union dues or fees for a cause in which they disagree.”
SCOTUS/Judiciary
Political Law Briefing: Procedural Complications Stall Decision by D.C. Circuit on Federal Government Contractor Contribution Ban
By Meg RohlfingA final ruling on the constitutionality of the long-standing ban on contributions by federal government contractors met a significant setback last week when the D.C. Circuit remanded the case to the trial court. In an opinion issued on May 31, 2013, about two weeks after oral arguments, a three judge panel of the D.C. Circuit concluded that the case, Wagner v. Federal Election Commission, must be heard en bancby the full panel of judges of the D.C. Circuit.The appellate court relied on an older provision of the Federal Election Campaign Act (“FECA”), section 437h, which states that the national committee of any political party, the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”), or any voter in a Presidential election “may” file a claim that a portion of the FECA is unconstitutional in a district court, and the district court “immediately shall” certify the constitutional questions to a circuit court, which must then hear the matter en banc. Last fall, a lower federal court heard the case and upheld the contractor ban, finding that it does not violate the First and Fifth Amendment rights of government contractors and concluding in two sentences that section 437h did not require certification of the constitutional questions.
FEC
Law and Politics Update: FEC Divide on ‘Personal Use’ Rules Shows Potential for Confusion
By Brian SvobodaTwo things were notable about MUR 6672, released last week by the Federal Election Commission, which involved the payment of $805.13 by Florida U.S. Representative Gus Bilirakis’ campaign to the Royal Order of Jesters for membership dues. The Commission deadlocked on party lines over whether there was reason to believe that Representative Bilirakis illegally converted campaign funds to his personal use through the payment.First, the matter showed how what is supposed to be a black-and-white test for personal use can create sharp disagreement in practice. The law prohibits candidates from using campaign funds to pay any expense that would exist irrespective of candidacy. It deems certain types of expenses to fall into this category automatically. These include “dues, fees or gratuities to a country club, health club, recreational facility or other nonpolitical organization.”
Candidates, Politicians and Parties
AP: Some Obama top political appointees using secret US government email accounts
The secret email accounts complicate an agency’s legal responsibilities to find and turn over emails in response to congressional or internal investigations, civil lawsuits or public records requests because employees assigned to compile such responses would necessarily need to know about the accounts to search them. Secret accounts also drive perceptions that government officials are trying to hide actions or decisions.
Lobbying and Ethics
National Journal: The Curious Case of Rick Renzi
By Billy HouseRenzi, 54, who served in Congress from 2003 to 2009, was indicted five years ago and now faces 32 counts of extortion, conspiracy, and fraud. Some of the charges involve his dealings with legislation tied to a complex land exchange between the federal government and Resolution Copper Mining, and whether he enriched himself by threatening to kill the deal unless the mining company bought land from a former business partner. His trial began May 7, and it is expected to take as long as two months.What has House leaders interested in the case is the Justice Department’s assertion that if Renzi uses any records of his own legislative activities as evidence in his defense during the trial—such as committee reports, notes, and records of meetings, bills, and resolutions, and even the act of voting—prosecutors would view that as tantamount to a waiver of his protections under the Constitution’s speech or debate clause.
State and Local
Connecticut –– The Courant: Campaign Bill Steers State Back To Dirtier Days
EditorialThe legislation doubles the amount a donor can give to party committees. It removes all limits on what state parties can spend on legislative races, whether to support or oppose candidates.It would bring back the ad booklets handed out at political events, a way of pouring more money into campaigns. It would lift the contribution ban on contractors doing work for the state — that’s one way former Gov. John G. Rowland got into trouble — and would allow contractors to give to their local town committees, another influence-buying technique.
Montana –– Missoulian: Montana GOP legislators launch effort to require disclosure of political ‘dark money’
By Mike DennisonA Republican-led group Monday launched a campaign for a Montana ballot measure that would require disclosure of political “dark money,” which group members said is corrupting the state’s political system.The initiative, if it qualifies for the 2014 ballot and is approved by Montana voters, would require any entities that spend money to influence campaigns in Montana to report that spending and the group’s financial supporters.
