Amending the First Amendment
Vox: President Obama: I’d love a constitutional amendment to reverse Citizens United
By Andrew ProkopArguing that “unlimited money” in politics is a key cause of polarization, Obama said, “I would love to see some constitutional process that would allow us to actually regulate campaign spending the way we used to, and maybe even improve it.”These comments — made in the midst of a long, big-picture response to a question on political polarization, during which several issues were discussed — go further than many of the president’s past public statements. During a Q&A with Redditin 2012, the president wrote that “over the long term, I think we need to seriously consider mobilizing a constitutional process to overturn Citizens United.” But he’s given little attention to the topic during his second term so far.Clearly, though, the president’s still not happy with the status quo, and would prefer a change. He’s floating an aggressive idea that may sound implausible, considering the hurdles involved in a constitutional amendment. It’s an idea, though, that most other top Democrats have already embraced.
National Review: The Brute-Force Left
By Kevin WilliamsonThe Wilsonian vision of domestic governance through expertise and fiat quickly devolved into a reality of goon squads, political persecution,crushing of dissent with formal and informal political violence, politicization of law enforcement, etc. The Occupy bomb-throwers and the imbecile hooligans committing arson to prove that “black lives matter” are not quite the American Protective League, but they’re of a piece with it. In the Wilson years, we had politicized police; in the Obama years, we have a weaponized IRS . . . and Justice Department, and police unions, and jailers’ unions. The Wilson-era progressives tried to use the Sedition Act to shut down critics of the great progressive. In our time, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Harry Reid want to throw people in prison for unpopular political activism of which they disapprove. The grand plans of 2009 are coming unraveled, as grand plans do, and so the Left grows ever more naked in its coercion. On the official side of the spectrum, you have Senate Democrats voting to repeal the First Amendment so that they can suppress political criticism. On the unofficial side — as the perpetually late-to-the-party Jonathan Chait has suddenly noticed — you have people such as Brendan Eich being run out of their jobs for holding unpopular political opinions, human-rights heroes such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali run off college campuses, and Trustafarians from suburban Boston shutting down emergency ambulance services because they are displeased about . . . something.
Independent Groups
Politico: David Brock resigns from Hillary Clinton PAC
By Kenneth P. VogelIn a resignation letter obtained by POLITICO, Brock, a close Clinton ally, accused Priorities officials of planting “an orchestrated political hit job” against his own pro-Clinton groups, American Bridge and Media Matters.Those groups — along with another pro-Clinton group, the super PAC Ready for Hillary — had their fundraising practices called into question last week by a New York Times report. It pointed out that veteran Democratic fundraiser Mary Pat Bonner got a 12.5 percent commission on funds she raised for Brock’s groups and a smaller percentage commission on cash she raised for Ready for Hillary.In his letter to the co-chairs of Priorities’ board — former Michigan Gov. Jennifer Granholm and former Obama campaign manager Jim Messina — Brock alleged that “current and former Priorities officials were behind this specious and malicious attack on the integrity of these critical organizations.”
Wall Street Journal: David Brock Resigns from Pro-Clinton Group, Then Opens Door for Return
By Rebecca Ballhaus“After talking to several leaders of Priorities USA Action, I am confident they want to address the situation,” Mr. Brock said in the statement. “I’m open to returning to the board and I share their desire to find a way to move forward. We will be meeting to work on establishing that path and strengthening our relationship and getting back to the important work we need to do in this election cycle.”
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
AP: In age of campaign mega-groups, solo spenders still compete
More than ever before, national political organizations dominated the financing of state-level races in 2014, especially the committees associated with the major parties and special interest groups, according to a new analysis from the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity.But while the Republican Governors Association and its Democratic counterpart alone put $100 million into campaigns for state offices, the institutional money didn’t completely eclipse dozens of people with serious wealth and a gambler’s willingness to put it on the line. Self-financed candidates wound up among the top donors in races in at least 24 states, the numbers show.“If you have cash and you always wanted to be an elected official, that’s certainly not deterring people from doing that,” Republican pollster Greg Strimple said.
Politico: Congressman’s spending brings Schock and awe
By Jake Sherman, John Bresnahan and Anna PalmerThe campaign filings — analyzed by POLITICO — help illustrate a pattern of aggressive spending by Schock. The issue was first raised by the Post, which reported his office had been decorated in the theme of “Downton Abbey,” the British drama about early-20th-century English aristocrats, complete with red-painted walls, an elaborate mirror and a “gold-colored wall sconce with black candle.” USA Today then disclosed that Schock had previously shelled out “tens of thousands” in taxpayer dollars on office renovations, leather furniture and amenities like granite countertops.
CPI: Potential 2016 candidates prime Iowa, New Hampshire with cash
By Michael BeckelIn August, U.S. Sen. Rand Paul and Iowa Republican state Rep. Bobby Kaufmann drove for an hour together between political events in Davenport and Iowa City, jawing about property rights and eminent domain.In October, Paul headlined a Kaufmann campaign fundraiser, where nearly 400 attendees chowed on barbecued pork, beans and cheesy potatoes in Kaufmann’s eastern Iowa hometown of Wilton, population 2,800.And that same month, Paul’s political action committee sent Kaufmann’s campaign a $1,000 check.
FEC
More Soft Money Hard Law: The Upcoming FEC Hearing and its Uses
By Bob BauerTo be sure, from time to time, a reform community complainant persuades a judge who is equally frustrated with the perceived shortcomings of campaign finance law to demand Commission action on one issue or the other. But overall, time has run on the argument that the FEC has the authority but lacks the will to achieve the major changes demanded by Democracy 21, the CLC and others.The Commission hearing to receive views and information on law and political action post-McCutcheon is a productive exercise, and its utility does not depend on the promulgation of aggressive new rules on Super PACs or any other issue in campaign finance. Professor Briffault has made a constructive contribution to the record on the advent of Super PACs and the questions from his perspective that their operation and proliferation raise. Democracy 21 and CLC want to keep things simple when, in fact, they are complicated: they are shopping an argument that has few buyers and that will not advance the discussion.
State and Local
Arizona –– Arizona Daily Star: State office working to close campaign finance loophole
By Howard FischerFirst, it would specify that groups that spend less than $500 would be exempt from having to register or report, which would cover most small groups.More significant, Spencer said a group would be required to register and report only if people got together “primarily to affect elections.”“This is going to exempt out folks who get together occasionally to talk politics,” he said. “But we don’t want to sweep them up into government regulation.”Spencer said those two changes should be enough to satisfy the concerns raised by Teilborg — and once again make campaign finance laws enforceable.
Oregon –– Statesman Journal: Secretary of State wants to limit campaign spending
By Hannah HoffmanOregon is one of just six states that places no limits on spending during political campaigns, and Secretary of State Kate Brown would like to see that change.She has introduced two bills related to this issue. One bill would amend the Oregon Constitution to allow placing campaign finance limits, and the other would create the new rules surrounding contributions.The idea of regulating campaign contributions is not unusual, and nearly all states do it, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Oregon is in a small club, joined by Alabama, Missouri, Nebraska, Utah and Virginia.
