In the News
Bloomberg: For the Wealthiest Political Donors, It Was a Very Good Year (Except Sheldon Adelson)
By Annie Linskey and Julie BykowiczDavid Keating, president of the Center for Competitive Politics, a group that argues the limits on political spending are arbitrary, sees it differently. “Big money in politics can actually make the electorate better informed,” he said. Besides, he added, there are enough billionaires to go around. For example, “you’ve got billionaires funding gun control and billionaires paying for groups that oppose gun control. It’s all pretty much a wash.”
The Hill: Firms skirting ‘pay-to-play’ prohibitions, advocates say
By Lydia WheelerKeating, of the Center for Competitive Politics, said it is a dangerous concept when people say the government should be in charge of who can say what when.He said Congress could pass legislation to reward and protect whistleblowers, if it wants to protect against corruption. But new restrictions on independent spending would be misplaced, he said.“It’s difficult to bribe a politician without someone knowing it,” he said, “so there’s a better way of addressing the problem than running around saying no one can give anything to any candidate or say anything about any candidate.”
FEC
Wall Street Journal: Online Political Opinions Don’t Need Regulating
By LEE E. GOODMANThat Internet freedom rule exempted all political commentary that citizens and groups distribute online free, whether in email or on websites, blogs or various social media platforms. The commission retained jurisdiction over two limited areas: political campaigns, parties and political-action committees that post communications on the Internet; and anyone else who posts express electoral advocacy online for an advertising fee—like a paid advertisement placed on television or in a newspaper.The rule opened a robust national forum for political discussion about public policy, government and elections. Millions of citizens are now empowered to speak widely as commenters, bloggers, podcasters, YouTube posters and Facebook supporters, while new technologies have facilitated a record number of new political communities at a fraction of historical costs. Political speech and civic engagement have flourished on the Internet.But this freedom can no longer be taken for granted. In a recent enforcement matter, a conservative group allegedly violated the law by posting two political videos on YouTube without reporting them to the FEC. The FEC’s Office of General Counsel recommended that the commission dismiss the case because the videos were disseminated free and solely on the Internet. I, along with two Republican colleagues, voted to dismiss the complaint, effectively blocking any further action. But three commissioners—two Democrats and one independent—voted to investigate the group.
Daily Signal: Threat to Online Speech: Q&A With the 2014 Elections Chief
By Melissa QuinnThe Federal Election Commission has steered clear of regulating political speech on the Internet. But the FEC’s outgoing chairman, Lee Goodman, warns that the commission could well impose rules on Americans who disseminate information on blogs, video channels or podcasts.Goodman, a Republican, last year headed the six-member FEC, which oversees campaign finance laws. In an exclusive interview with The Daily Signal before his term ended, he discussed a 3-3 decision by the six-member commission in response to a complaint filed against a nonprofit group called Checks and Balances for Economic Growth.The nonprofit had posted two campaign videos on YouTube without making disclaimers or divulging production costs. The complaint alleged that Checks and Balances violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 because it didn’t disclose the information.Goodman and the two other Republicans on the panel contended that free postings on the Internet are exempt from the law. However, FEC Vice Chairman Ann Ravel, a Democrat, called for a “re-examination of the commission’s approach to the Internet.” Such a review, Ravel said, is “long overdue.”
Campaign Finance
Wall Street Journal: Campaign-Finance Bondage
EditorialCampaign-finance reformers claim to oppose “big money” in politics, but more often small citizen groups get caught in the webs that regulate political speech. That’s what has happened in Arizona, where a federal court recently formalized a decision striking down the state’s byzantine definition of a “political committee.” The court’s decision invalidates many of the Arizona campaign laws that depend on that definition.In 2011 Dina Galassini, a resident of Fountain Hills, Ariz., emailed 23 acquaintances about staging an old-fashioned protest against a bond measure scheduled for a town vote. Her plan: Make homemade signs and wave them on the street to convince people to oppose the bond issue. Ms. Galassini estimates she spent about $25 on her advocacy. Sounds like grass-roots democracy in action—except to the campaign police.Her email made its way to the town’s election officers, who promptly warned her in a letter not to engage in any further political speech until she registered as a political committee. Under the law in Fountain Hills, as soon as two or more people associate and either accept any contributions or spend money for a political purpose, they had to be considered a political-action committee.
Independent Groups
Wall Street Journal: 2016 Populism on Left — or Right — Worries Chamber of Commerce
By Patrick O’ConnorOfficials at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce are concerned enough to consider taking sides in 2016, a major shift for the 102-year-old organization that typically avoids White House races.In a recent interview, Chamber Chief Executive Tom Donohue said his group may break from that longstanding policy, if either party nominates a candidate who wants to “do away with the system of open and free capital.”The Chamber chief made it clear that he wasn’t talking about one party or the other, but rather strains that exist at both ends of the political spectrum. “I’m not talking about liberal Democrats; I’m talking about the progressives that really think they should destroy the system,” he said, adding “you’ve got the same thing” on the right.
SCOTUS/Judiciary
Washington Post: Judge candidates’ free-speech rights at issue before the Supreme Court
By Robert BarnesLater this month, the justices will consider whether the action that got the lawyer into trouble — violating Florida’s restriction against directly soliciting contributions to judge campaigns — is instead an unreasonable constraint on Williams-Yulee’s right to free speech.Florida is among the vast majority of states that require the election of at least some judges. (Federal judges, by contrast, are nominated by the president and confirmed by the Senate to lifetime appointments.)But 30 states prohibit judicial candidates from directly asking for campaign contributions, in most cases leaving that work to a committee the candidate establishes.
Wisconsin
Wisconsin Reporter: GAB offers contradictory defense of its John Doe activities
By M.D. KittleMADISON, Wis. — The agency charged with overseeing Wisconsin’s election laws now admits it flouted judicial and public oversight of its activities — even using secret email accounts to circumvent public oversight.But in its court filing Monday, the Government Accountability Board still maintains it violated no laws in helping Milwaukee District Attorney John Chisholm, a Democrat, use Wisconsin’s John Doe law to investigate the members of some 29 conservative organizations.The GAB’s 50-page response is the latest action in a lawsuit filed by conservatives who say the agency exceeded its authority and violated their civil rights in conducting the probe.
Wisconsin State Journal: Republicans eye rewrite of campaign finance laws, other election changes
By Matthew DeFourRepublicans, in firm control of state government when they take office Monday, are poised to make the most sweeping revisions to state campaign finance law in decades.Many of those changes are already in effect after a series of federal court decisions made many current laws unenforceable. But a more comprehensive rewrite is in the works, and the overhaul is getting a thumbs up from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Board — a frequent target of GOP ire that is itself in line for a possible makeover.Among other things, lawmakers are considering increasing campaign contribution limits and clarifying the coordination restrictions at the heart of a recent John Doe investigation into Gov. Scott Walker’s recall campaign.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
AP: New Congress Includes More Women, Minorities
WASHINGTON — The 114th Congress that convenes Tuesday will count more minorities and women than ever, although lawmakers remain overwhelmingly white and male in the Republican-controlled House and Senate.A record 104 women will serve in Congress, and for the first time, African-American members of both genders and representing both parties will be among the ranks on Capitol Hill.The number of female lawmakers is up slightly from 100 at the close of the last Congress, but represents about 20 percent of the total in Congress. It’s far less than the nearly 51 percent of the U.S. population.
First Amendment
Wall Street Journal: Free Speech’s Shrinking Circle of Friends
By Barry A. FisherProtesters have silenced speakers on several occasions this year, sometimes with the law’s support. In February a panel of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a California high school’s decision to prohibit students from wearing American-flag T-shirts on Cinco de Mayo “to avert violence.” In August a panel of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the ejection of an anti-Islam Christian group from an Arab festival in Dearborn, Mich., on the theory that the group’s speech would incite festivalgoers to violence. (In October the full court agreed to reconsider the decision.)In December protesters against the non-indictment of a police officer in Ferguson, Mo., stormed into an auditorium at the University of California, Berkeley, and shut down a speech by Internet entrepreneur Peter Thiel . And during the past academic year, protesters caused the cancellation of commencement addresses by former U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice at Rutgers University, and International Monetary Fund Director Christine Lagarde at Smith College.There is growing support, including among academics and racial and religious advocacy groups, that what they define as hate speech like Terminiello’s is simply outside the First Amendment’s protection. Law professors have concocted influential concepts like “outsider jurisprudence,” “critical race theory,” “critical feminist theory, and “storytelling” theory to define some kinds of politically incorrect speech as not speech at all, but “mechanisms of subordination.”
State and Local
AP: Governors’ inaugurals fueled by political donors
AUSTIN, Texas — When it comes to parties, ringing in the new year has nothing on the swearing-in soirees for governors across the country.In Texas, organizers are hoping to raise $4 million to celebrate the incoming governor and are planning a concert headlined by Lady Antebellum, a parade through the state capital and a barbecue with four tons of brisket. Supporters of re-elected Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker are scheduling a series of events that include a “black tie optional” gala funded in part through sponsorship packages costing up to $30,000 each.Inaugural activities celebrating the newly elected Democratic governor in Pennsylvania will cost donors up to $50,000 apiece and include an evening “Let’s Get Started” bash, with “celebratory attire” recommended.
