In the News
Daily Caller: Claims: Obama administration’s new nonprofit rules violate the Paperwork Reduction Act
By Patrick Howley
“The IRS grossly underestimates the record-keeping burden” of the new rule, Center for Competitive Politics senior fellow Eric Wang told TheDC, claiming two violations of the Paperwork Reduction Act.
The IRS estimated in its “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” that the new rule would only cost
nonprofit groups two extra hours of record-keeping time. But Wang said that the agency’s estimate refers to only one small ”sliver” of the new record-keeping requirements put forth by the rule.
“The two-hour estimate they provided is for this new requirement about 501(c)(4) groups giving grants to other 501(c) groups,” which requires the recipient to fill out paperwork certifying that the grants were not used for candidate-related political activity. But that provision is “only one-tenth of the substance of the proposed rule,” according to Wang.
CCP
Solicitation and Coordination
By Brad Smith
All this caught the eye of the indefatigable Bob Bauer, who argues that this is wrong. Bauer agrees with me (as does Hasen – at least I think they agree, making this a formidable trio) that the key to understanding Buckley v. Valeo is the concept of quid pro quo corruption – a bargaining of official favors in exchange for something. Corresponding interests and even gratitude are not enough. But Bauer argues that not any opportunity for bargaining behavior can be regulated under Buckley. He argues that the actual expenditure must be coordinated. Thus, it doesn’t matter if a candidate solicits funds for a Super PAC. If the actual expenditure is not coordinated, than there cannot be a coordinated expenditure. Bob notes that “[t]he same corruption could arise out of a commitment by a donor to give funds to the officeholder’s favored charity, or to another federal candidate or the political party within the limits.”
This is not merely an academic debate, because it appears that zealous legislators are not attempting to use the solicitation issue to define coordination, thus sharply limiting what these PACs might do. For example, Bauer reportsin another post that the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board appears poised to approve a rule that would define coordination to include any candidate fundraising support for an independent committee, thus preventing the committee from making unlimited expenditures for the candidate. There are rumbles of similar proposals elsewhere. Those who want to shut down Super PACs believe they have found a way, it appears. After all, “even Smith” agrees, and it’s pretty hard to find a better endorsement for regulation than that. If “even Smith” agrees, surely we have a regulatory winner!
Thus I must, it seems, attempt to clarify my position here. In the passage cited by Hasen and Bauer, I had in mind a particular type of Super PAC – a Super PAC with an announced goal of spending to support the election of a single candidate, with fundraising undertaken by that candidate. As I wrote just before the line that Hasen and Bauer caught…
Independent Groups
The Hill: Panel votes to block IRS regulations
By Bernie Becker
Republicans have said the proposed rules are an affront to the First Amendment, and would merely institutionalize the targeting of Tea Party groups that the IRS apologized for in May 2013. The Treasury Department and the IRS released the proposed rules — which have received tens of thousands of comments so far — in November.
“Some in Washington have tried to sweep this under the rug, calling the IRS targeting an attempt to ‘streamline determinations’ that was based in ‘confusion’ about the rules,” House Ways and Means Chairman Dave Camp (R-Mich.). “That rhetoric does not match the reality of what this investigation has uncovered so far.”
Politico: The state races ignored — until now
By Tal Kopan
The outsiders believe that winning these offices could give their side an edge in the 2016 presidential race, because secretaries of state run elections and can shape voter ID rules and other details. When margins are tight, those small differences can mean the difference between a big win — and a loss.
So while some candidates and state parties say they fear the new outside money and players are going to turn these local races into expensive — and nasty — displays, the outsiders say that’s a chance worth taking when the stakes are as high as the White House.
“I’m certainly not surprised. We’ve seen an increased attention over the last number of years because if you can influence how the votes are cast you could certainly influence the results thereof,” said Colorado GOP Chairman Ryan Call. “And the truth is, here in Colorado and throughout the nation, with the changes enacted to our elections laws, who the secretary of state is really matters.”
Washington Post: IRS plan to curb politically active groups is threatened by opposition from both sides
By Matea Gold
Conservatives call it a scheme to silence President Obama’s critics. Liberals complain the administration risks trampling on the First Amendment.
Protests are coming from all directions over the Obama administration’s proposal to curb secretive groups that play an increasingly dominant role in American politics. In 2012, such tax-exempt organizations poured hundreds of millions of dollars into campaign-related ads, and they are taking the lead in shaping the landscape of this year’s midterm elections.
USA Today: Super PACs hide their intentions behind fuzzy names
By Fredreka Schouten
“They are trying to blur who they are,” Bill Allison of the Sunlight Foundation said of the proliferation of vague names. His group tracks campaign money.
“They want the focus to not be on the name, but on the content of their ads,” he said. “I’m surprised we haven’t had the Cute Puppies and Kittens super PAC yet.”
Note: How is wanting people to focus on the content of speech rather than dwelling on the speaker a problem?
Washington Post: Insurers now outspending Kochs’ group on Obamacare ads
By SANDHYA SOMASHEKHAR
Much has been made about Americans for Prosperity’s prodigious spending on an ad campaign opposed to the new health-care law.
But another player, which is casting the program in a different light, is giving the conservative advocacy group a run for its money: the health insurance industry.
Companies such as Cigna and Kaiser Permanente poured about $40 million into television ads specifically related to Obamacare between Dec. 1 and Feb. 8, according to ad tracking firm Kantar Media. That is far more than AFP, which as of last week had dropped about $27 million on ads since August attacking politicians who supported the program.
NY Times: Left and Right Object to I.R.S. Plan to Restrict Nonprofits’ Political Activity
By Carl Hulse
In a rare agreement between Tea Party and liberal activists, organizations across the political spectrum say new regulations drafted by the Internal Revenue Service to curb a surge in political spending and activity by nonprofits are far too broad. They fear that enforcement of the regulations would chill more neutral civic initiatives such as voter registration efforts and candidate forums.
Disclosure
CPI: GOP megadonor Harold Simmons bankrolled liberal causes
By Dave Levinthal
Furthermore, Public Campaign, a nonpartisan outfit “dedicated to sweeping campaign reform that aims to dramatically reduce the role of big special interest money in American politics,” received $350,000 from the Harold Simmons Foundation for a “campaign finance reform project.” It’s due another $250,000 in future cash, records show.
State and Local
Arizona –– AP: Arizona AG: I broke no campaign finance laws
By Bob Christie
“We absolutely never coordinated or violated any of the laws,” he said. “I absolutely never did coordinate with Kathleen Winn.”
Horne said that while he did send an email to Winn urging her to raise another $100,000 from a national Republican group, he made a legal distinction between helping an independent committee raise funds and telling it how to spend the money or helping it design an ad, for instance.
Kentucky –– Surf KY: House Speaker Greg Stumbo Files Campaign Finance Legislation
Under Stumbo’s plan, once a candidate for Governor or their running mate donates $1,000,000 or more to their own campaign committee, it requires that slate to file a “Notice of Self-Funding” with the Kentucky Registry of Election Finance.
Upon a receipt of a Notice of Self-Funding, the Registry will notify, within two business days, all other candidates filed for Governor that they would now be able to accept $2,500 per individual instead of the current $1,000 limit.
Louisiana –– AP: Ex-New Orleans mayor convicted of taking bribes
NEW ORLEANS — Former News Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin, best remembered for his impassioned pleas for help after the levees broke during Hurricane Katrina, was convicted Wednesday of accepting bribes in exchange for helping businessmen secure millions of dollars in city work, including after the devastating storm.
The federal jury found Nagin guilty of 20 of 21 counts against him, involving a string of crimes before and after the storm. He sat quietly at the defense table after the verdict was read and his wife, Seletha, was being consoled in the front row.
Minnesota –– AP: Minnesota campaign finance regulators reinforce firewall
By Brian Bakst
Board member George Beck said the ruling maintains the “highest degree of separation” possible between candidates and the affected groups. Board opinions are technically nonbinding, but they often provide a road map for future campaign activity and guide investigations when complaints arise.
Regulators were responding to a request from David Asp, the Minneapolis attorney for a candidate who was approached about raising money for an unidentified independent group. Asp wouldn’t publicly identify the candidate, but an adviser to Republican gubernatorial candidate Jeff Johnson confirmed to the Associated Press the request came on behalf of his campaign.
New Jersey –– Inquirer: Christie campaign gets OK to raise funds for legal fees
By Andrew Seldman
TRENTON A New Jersey elections panel voted Tuesday that Gov. Christie’s reelection campaign can use money remaining in its account and raise more funds to comply with subpoenas issued by legislators and federal prosecutors.
The subpoenas stem from investigations into September lane closures at the George Washington Bridge, which caused massive traffic jams and were allegedly carried out by Christie allies to exact political revenge against the mayor of Fort Lee.
