In the News
The Libertarian Republic: Four Years Later: Citizens United Has Created More Competitive Elections
By Joe Trotter
The Supreme Court’s decision overturned blatantly unconstitutional parts of a law designed to prevent freedom of association among individuals with the purpose of speaking out about politics. At its core, Citizens United was about whether the government could ban a nonprofit corporation, from distributing a movie about a political candidate.
The decision did not “reversed a century of law to open the floodgates – including foreign corporations – to spend without limit in our elections,” as President Barack Obama famously chastised the Supreme Court. Rather, the decision allowed organizations to do what wealthy individuals have always been able to do: make independent expenditures advocating for or against a chosen candidate.
Bloomberg: Citizens United Four Years Later, `Free Speech’ or `Legalized Bribery’
By MARK SILVA
The anniversary of the ruling also has inspired some creative commentary, including this web video from the Center for Competitive Politics, featuring a YouTube star of sorts, GoRemy: (On corporations as people, The AFL-CIO doesn’t have two arms, he notes. Nor does Citigroup have two eyes — though, actually it does have two I’s.) “Free speech” is good, he says on behalf of a group promoting the ruling as its guarantor.
Hot Air: Video: Citizens United is 4, world inexplicably has not ended yet
By Mary Katharine Ham
Remember how bad the Citizens United decision was going to be for America? It was so bad no one would ever win an election fair and square again. It was so bad any ol’ billionaire could just buy any election he wanted. It was so bad it was worth President Obama calling out SCOTUS justices in an unprecedentedly rude move at the State of the Union.
Politico: Citizens United, 4 years later
By Byron Tau
The ruling has helped reshape the campaign finance landscape by paving the way for megadonors and campaign consultants to wrest power away from the K Street fundraising circuit and the political parties, but just not in the way critics first envisioned.
“Citizens United has become the all-purpose boogeyman,” said Bradley Smith, an election law expert, founder of the Center for Competitive Politics and a noted skeptic of campaign finance restrictions. “Whatever you hate about campaigns, blame Citizens United.”
Tuesday is the anniversary of Citizens United, which comes as the Supreme Court prepares to rule on another major campaign finance case, McCutcheon v. FEC. In that case, justices will consider the constitutionality of the aggregate donation limits to political parties and candidates. A ruling in McCutcheon could come as early as Wednesday.
CCP
5 Things You Didn’t Know About Citizens United
By Joe Trotter
Today the Center for Competitive Politics marked the fourth anniversary of theCitizens United v. Federal Election Commission ruling by releasing a video about the decision by noted YouTube artist GoRemy.
The video examines five common misconceptions about the Citizens United that many critics of the decision tend to gloss over, such as the government’s argument that they should be able to ban books and that the decision did not create the concept of corporate personhood.
Independent Groups
CPI: Hillary Clinton: the ‘Citizens United’ candidate
By Dave Levinthal
An oft-forgotten footnote to the Supreme Court’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision is that it all began with a low-budget film about Hillary Clinton.
Now today, on the fourth anniversary of Citizens United — a case that helped transmute the nation’s campaign financing system into one of unlimited spending and endless electioneering — Clinton may become its beneficiary-in-chief, poised to cash in like no other political candidate has before.
Consider that the Ready for Hillary super PAC has already raised millions of dollars from tens of thousands of donors and plans to transfer itsunparalleled resources to a future Clinton campaign machine. Another super PAC, the previously pro-Barack Obama Priorities USA Action that raised more than $79 million during the last election cycle, has begun transitioning into a Clinton shadow operation.
Mother Jones: Meet the New Kochs: The DeVos Clan’s Plan to Defund the Left
By Andy Kroll
THE DEVOSES sit alongside the Kochs, the Bradleys, and the Coorses as founding families of the modern conservative movement. Since 1970, DeVos family members have invested at least $200 million in a host of right-wing causes—think tanks, media outlets, political committees, evangelical outfits, and a string of advocacy groups. They have helped fund nearly every prominent Republican running for national office and underwritten a laundry list of conservative campaigns on issues ranging from charter schools and vouchers to anti-gay-marriage and anti-tax ballot measures. “There’s not a Republican president or presidential candidate in the last 50 years who hasn’t known the DeVoses,” says Saul Anuzis, a former chairman of the Michigan Republican Party.
Nowhere has the family made its presence felt as it has in Michigan, where it has given more than $44 million to the state party, GOP legislative committees, and Republican candidates since 1997. “It’s been a generational commitment,” Anuzis notes. “I can’t start to even think of who would’ve filled the void without the DeVoses there.”
The family fortune flows from 87-year-old Richard DeVos Sr. The son of poor Dutch immigrants, he cofounded the multilevel-marketing giant Amway with Jay Van Andel, a high school pal, in 1959. Five decades later, the company now sells $11 billion a year worth of cosmetics, vitamin supplements, kitchenware, air fresheners, and other household products. Amway has earned DeVos Sr. at least $6 billion; in 1991, he expanded his empire by buying the NBA’s Orlando Magic. The Koch brothers can usually expect Richard and his wife, Helen, to attend theirbiannual donor meetings. He is a lifelong Christian conservative and crusader for free markets and small government, values he passed down to his four children.
National Journal: Hillary Clinton Super PAC Starting to Look More Like the Obama Machine
By Beth Reinhard
A groundswell of support, especially among women hungry to make history in 2016, fueled Ready for Hillary’s growth (70 percent of the donors are women). So did a recognition from longtime Clinton allies—who feared the group bestowed a potentially toxic whiff of inevitability—that the PAC could pose an even bigger liability if it didn’t succeed. The decision by a handful of Obama’s top operatives to join the bandwagon reflects the overwhelming perception within the Democratic establishment that Clinton will be the next nominee.
“She’s the only candidate from either party that could lay the kind of groundwork that we’re seeking,” said Mitch Stewart, a top Obama strategist who is helping Ready for Hillary boost its online presence and connect with critical voter constituencies. “Not to take advantage of that enthusiasm would be gross malpractice.”
Lobbying and Ethics
Reuters: Obama lobbying ban faces setback in court
By ANDY SULLIVAN
(Reuters) – President Barack Obama’s attempt to minimize the influence of “special interests” on his administration received a setback on Friday when a U.S. judge reinstated a lawsuit challenging his ban on lobbyists serving on government advisory boards.
The ruling amounts to a partial victory for Washington’s 12,000 registered lobbyists, many of whom feel they have been unfairly tarred by Obama’s efforts to keep them out of public service.
At issue is whether registered lobbyists can serve on the 1,000 or so advisory committees that help the federal government shape policy on everything from nuclear waste to housing. Obama banned lobbyists from serving on such boards in 2010, arguing in a memorandum that “special interests” had “drowned out the voices of ordinary Americans.”
FEC
AP: Federal Election Commission Says Former Idaho Sen. Larry Craig Spent Money Illegally
Federal Election Commission lawyers urged a federal judge not to heed U.S. Sen. Larry Craig’s contention that regulators are being too hard on him and force him to pay nearly $360,000 in fines and restitution for tapping campaign accounts for his legal defense following his 2007 arrest in an airport bathroom sex sting.
State and Local
New York –– New York Daily News: EXCLUSIVE: Rep. Michael Grimm may have used ‘donor swapping’ to skirt fundraising limits
By Dan Friedman
The swapping works like this: A donor gives the maximum to Candidate A donates to Candidate B — and in return, a donor or friend of Candidate B gives an identical amount to Candidate A.
A Daily News review of 2010 federal fundraising records found more than 20 transactions that suggest supporters of Grimm and candidates in California, South Dakota, Illinois and Virginia swapped donations totalling more than $75,000.
Utah –– KUTV: Utah Senator Calling For Campaign Finance Reform
A special investigator hired by the Utah House of Representatives said the campaign organization for former Utah Attorney General John Swallow misused campaign funds. Swallow stepped down last month, amidst allegations of bribery and other charges, while denying any wrongdoing.
“These lobbyists – people that have contracts with the state of Utah – can go up and say, ‘Thank you so much for the good job you’re doing, Governor,’ and hand a check – and do hand a check – for 10, 20, 30, 50 thousand dollars,” Dabakis said. “And to pretend that that has no effect, that’s like in John Swallowville. It’s not accepting the reality.”
Dabakis is proposing a $10,000 cap for campaign contributions for each organization or individual to go toward the candidates for statewide public offices and $5,000 for state legislators’ campaigns.
Virginia –– Washington Post: Former Va. Gov. McDonnell and wife charged in gifts case
By Rosalind S. Helderman, Carol D. Leonnig and Sari Horwitz
Former Virginia governor Robert F. McDonnell and his wife, Maureen, were charged Tuesday with illegally accepting gifts, luxury vacations and large loans from a wealthy Richmond-area businessman who sought special treatment from state government.
Authorities alleged that for nearly two years, the McDonnells hit up executive Jonnie R. Williams Sr. again and again, lodging near constant requests for large loans, clothes, trips, golf accessories and private plane rides.
