In the News
NY Times: Against Disclosure
By CCP Academic Advisor David Primo
Shareholders need such information, advocates say, in order to hold managers accountable and reduce risks to the company and its reputation. Democracy itself, the argument continues, benefits when voters know more about how corporations operate.
But a number of recent studies, including some of my own, suggest that this view is shortsighted. Disclosure, though frequently valuable, often leads to adverse unintended consequences that can outweigh its benefits.
Groups like the Center for Political Accountability that favor greater disclosure often cite the experience of Target. In 2010, Target, to comply with a disclosure law, made public its contribution to a pro-business group called MN Forward. Gay rights activists then led boycotts and store protests of Target because MN Forward supported the pro-business Minnesota candidate for governor Tom Emmer, who also opposed gay marriage.
CCP
The Curious Case of Contribution Limits in an Era of Independent Expenditures
By Luke Wachob
Minnesota’s position is not unusual. The trend of increasing independent expenditures in elections has causedconcern among policymakers that candidates and political parties are weakened in an era of rising independent spending. A simple way to address this would be to liberalize campaign contributions. The recent band of states raising contribution limits is a good start, but changes should go further, as Minnesota’s case demonstrates.
Individuals have been able to spend unlimited amounts on independent speech in every state since 1976’s Supreme Court decision in Buckley v. Valeo. 2010’s Citizens United and SpeechNow.org decisions extended that right to groups of people, such as corporations, trade associations, and unions.
While independent speech cannot be limited, direct contributions to candidates from individuals (and groups like political parties and PACs) are severely limited in many states. Even after 2013’s contribution limit increases, Minnesotans are able to give just $1,000 (formerly $500) in election years to candidates for the Minnesota House of Representatives or the Minnesota Senate. Fewer than ten states have lower limits than Minnesota’s for individuals donating to State Senate or State House candidates. Minnesota’s limit on contributions to gubernatorial candidates is also still lower than most states, now at $4,000 (formerly $2,000) in election years.
Independent Groups
Washington Post: ‘Unobtainium’ and the blurry lines of campaign finance law
By Matea Gold
Katzenberg, an early and generous patron of Priorities USA, “pitched the lunch to invitees as a once-in-a-lifetime experience – what he called ‘unobtainium,’ ” the authors write. “He recommended that they donate $1 million to Priorities, and bagged three checks in that amount just the Friday before.”
To attend an official Priorities USA event would have been a substantial about-face for Obama, a vociferous critic of outside groups. The president was reluctant to endorse the efforts of the super PAC when it was launched by two of his former White House aides. And when he finally gave the group his blessing, campaign manager Jim Messina stressed in a blog post that Obama, Vice President Biden and first lady Michelle Obama would steer clear of Priorities events.
The White House said this week that the gathering at Katzenberg’s home was an official Obama for America campaign event, not a super PAC event.
AP: Montana judge considers fining political group; lawyer asks to be removed
By Matt Gouras
HELENA – A Montana judge will decide without a court hearing whether to hit a conservative political group with a hefty fine for improper campaign spending after American Traditional Partnership’s lawyer asked to be removed.
District Judge Jeffrey Sherlock said Friday he would rule based on briefs filed in the proceedings against the political group known for challenging state campaign finance laws and targeting moderate Republicans.
Disclosure
Elko Daily Free Press: Should newspapers have to file campaign finance reports?
By Chuck Muth
Clearly, different folks of reasonable mind can come up with different interpretations as to whether certain advertising constitutes “express advocacy” or “issue advocacy,” making it painfully obvious that there is enough ambiguity in the law to make it virtually impossible for the average citizen to know what the heck the campaign finance rules are these days.
Equally troubling, however, is how some members of the media have responded to the AFP decision; siding with Miller and championing “transparency” (which is not in the Constitution) over free and anonymous speech. With all due respect, these folks might want to rethink their position because … they could be next.
Indeed, there is no special carve-out in the First Amendment for the press. If the government can successfully force disclosure of donors to non-profit organizations, what’s to stop it from forcing similar disclosure reporting of the financing for newspapers (which outright endorse candidates), columnists and blogs?
FEC
Politico: FEC poised to allow Bitcoin campaign donations
By Byron Tau
Political campaigns will be allowed to accept — but not spend — the digital currency Bitcoin, under a proposed federal rule released Thursday.
The Federal Election Commission draft would require campaigns to first convert any Bitcoins collected as donation to dollars.
State and Local
California –– Sacramento Bee: Campaign finance rule trips up former California lawmaker
Lobbyists registered with the state can advise their clients on which campaigns they should support, and they frequently attend swanky fundraising events on their clients’ dime.
But one thing California lobbyists can’t do is personally write checks to state-level campaigns.
District of Columbia –– Politico: Federal workers in D.C. get OK to run for office
By Josh Gerstein
Federal workers who live in Washington, D.C. will soon be able to run in contested, partisan elections without running afoul of the Hatch Act, a federal law which limits politicking by employees of the U.S. government.
New York –– NY Daily News: John Liu To Sue Over Campaign Finance Board’s Matching Funds Denial
By Greg B. Smith
Liu notified his own office that he is seeking unspecified damages for “deprivation of civil rights, mental and emotional harm, loss of dignity, loss of earnings and professional reputation,” according to the notice of claim.
Richard Emery, a well-known attorney who was a big fundraiser for Mayor-Elect Bill de Blasio, is representing Liu in his quest to seek damages from the Campaign Finance Board.
Texas –– KHOU 11: White guy wins after leading voters to believe he’s black
By Doug Miller
Still, he figured he’d have fun running, because he was fed up with what he called “all the shenanigans” at the Houston Community College System. As a conservative white Republican running in a district whose voters are overwhelmingly black Democrats, the odds seemed overwhelmingly against him.
Then he came up with an idea, an advertising strategy that his opponent found “disgusting.” If a white guy didn’t have a chance in a mostly African-American district, Wilson would lead voters to think he’s black.
Virginia –– Politico: Ken Cuccinelli eyed Bob McDonnell removal
By EMILY SCHULTHEIS
As the possibility of a federal indictment swirled around scandal-plagued Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell this summer, Republican gubernatorial candidate Ken Cuccinelli was planning a “dramatic” break from the sitting governor in which he would use the Virginia state Constitution to try to remove McDonnell from office, a prominent state political analyst reported Thursday.
According to Larry Sabato at the University of Virginia’s Center for Politics, Cuccinelli planned to employ a never-before-used section of the state Constitution to deem McDonnell unfit to govern.
