In the News
The Hill: SEC nears decision on requiring businesses to disclose donations
By Ben Goad…Further, some contend that shareholders themselves are opposed to the rules. In several publicized votes, investors have rejected the plan, noted Allen Dickerson, legal director for the nonprofit Center for Competitive Politics, which promotes First Amendment protections.Dickerson said it is not the SEC’s place to promulgate rules that many investors don’t want.“It seems paternalistic, to put it lightly,” he said.The article continues: “Taking this up will say something about the agency’s priorities,” Dickerson said.
Cato Institute: Did Citizens United Critics Push the IRS to Misbehave?
By CCP Academic Advisor John SamplesMany people recall that the Nixon administration used the IRS to harass political opponents. Surely the IG’s report and subsequent investigations will show whether the IRS has gotten back into the business of protecting an incumbent administration from its critics.It is not too soon, however, to recall the the campaign finance reform lobby has been calling for a crackdown on political groups since the Citizens United decision. One possibility would be that the IRS gave in pressure from the reform lobby and went after the Tea Party groups.
Heartland Institute: The Taxman Cometh (for Tea Partiers)
By Ross KaminskyOne legislative canary in the coalmine is the horrendous “campaign finance” measure known as the Follow the Money Act, co-sponsored by Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and Lisa Murkowski (RINO-AK), which would require onerous registration and reporting requirements for any group spending or receiving over $10,000 in “independent federal election related activity” during an election cycle. As the Center for Competitive Politics puts it, “If enacted, this bill would dragoon the IRS into a role as political campaign enforcer, a role the IRS is ill-equipped for and does not want.”
CCP
Independent Groups
Washington Post: IG report: ‘Inappropriate criteria’ stalled IRS approvals of conservative groups
Media Watch: NYT’s Coverage of IRS Scandal Speaks Volumes
By Joe TrotterThat’s because “many on the right” are correct: if your agenda doesn’t fit in the Time’s narrative, you cannot get a fair shake from the New York Times. Time and time again the Grey Lady has been egregiously wrong on campaign finance issues.
Center for Competitive Politics urges the Supreme Court not to defer to Congress when reviewing contribution limits
By Sarah LeeIn its friend-of-the-court brief, CCP urges the Court to put teeth into rigorous review of laws regulating political speech and suggests that courts err in granting excessive deference to Congress, which has a vested self-interest in these laws and is demonstrably not possessed of “particular expertise.” The brief notes that “Of course, these two options are not mutually exclusive. Some members of Congress may be conniving, and others ignorant.”
Shifting Blame for the IRS Scandal
By Sarah LeeAnd to blame Citizens United — presumably because the decision was instrumental in allowing for the creation of some of these groups the IRS was overzealously interested in — is tantamount to asserting that we shouldn’t have left the steak on the kitchen floor if we didn’t want the dog to eat it.
Independent Groups
Washington Post: IG report: ‘Inappropriate criteria’ stalled IRS approvals of conservative groups
By Juliet Eilperin and Zachary A. GoldfarbThe report, which is due to be released this week, said the targeting campaign would “stay in place for more than 18 months.” Of the 298 total applications the IG report reviewed as of Dec. 17, “108 had been approved, 28 were withdrawn by the application, none had been denied, and 160 were open from 206 to 1,138 calendar days (some for more than three years and crossing two election cycles.)”
USA Today: IRS: ‘We should have done a better job’
By IRS Acting Commissioner Steven T. MillerMistakes were made, but they were in no way due to any political or partisan motivation. We are — and will continue to be — dedicated to reviewing all applications for tax-exempt status in an impartial manner.
Examiner: Nothing to joke about in a partisan IRS
By Gene Healy (Cato Institute Vice President)Past presidents have found the IRS an extremely useful piece of federal machinery for that purpose. A lot of what we know about that sordid history comes from the Senate Select Committee on intelligence abuses, chaired by Sen. Frank Church, D-Idaho, in the mid-’70s.As Chris Hayes wrote in the Nation in 2006, “Church and many Democrats had every reason to believe they would be chiefly unmasking the full depths of Nixon’s perfidy,” but soon found that presidents of both parties were culpable: “Secret documents obtained by the committee even revealed that the sainted FDR had ordered IRS audits of his political enemies.”…
The Atlantic: Congress Put Pressure on the IRS to Investigate Conservative Tax-Exempt Groups
By Garance Franke-RutaA report in Roll Call in March 2012 revealed that leading members of Congress not only were aware that the Internal Revenue Service had begun investigating the political activity of would-be 501(c)4 Tea Party groups that winter, but showed to what an extent members of Congress had been actively putting pressure on the agency to take a closer look at tax-exempt conservative organizations in the wake of the Supreme Court’s Citizens United ruling.
Disclosure
NPR: SEC Focus May Lead To 2012 Stock Act Being Amended
Lobbying and Ethics
Washington Post: Lobbying registrations for April return to numbers not seen since 2011
State and Local
NPR: SEC Focus May Lead To 2012 Stock Act Being Amended
By Peter OverbyOne other reason Congress might like a rule on disclosure: it would affect the firms that gather political intelligence, but not the lawmakers and Hill staffers who supply it.
Lobbying and Ethics
Washington Post: Lobbying registrations for April return to numbers not seen since 2011
By Catherine HoApril marked a spike in activity on K Street, with corporations, trade groups and other entities tapping outside lobbyists at a rate not seen since mid-2011.Last month saw 686 new lobbying registrations — reports that lobbyists must file with the Senate when they contact members of Congress on behalf of a new client. The last time the volume of new lobbying registrations even came close to that number was in April 2011, when lobbying firms registered 685 new clients.
State and Local
California –– LA Times: the mayoral money trap
By Jim NewtonBut Los Angeles has one regulation that doesn’t show up in many other places, and it doesn’t make much sense: Candidates who raise money for an election cannot carry that money over if they fail to win in the first round and face a runoff for the same office. What that’s meant in this election cycle is that both Councilman Eric Garcetti and Controller Wendy Greuel, who spent years raising money for the first round of the campaign for mayor, had to start all over when they made the runoff.Because of the law, at the very moment a mayoral campaign gets serious and voters tune in, candidates have to return to the unpleasant business of begging for money. Immediately after winning the first round in the mayor’s race, for instance, Garcetti darted off to Washington for fundraisers. And Greuel turned to stalwart supporters to post 82 donations in 72 hours, all at the maximum amount of $1,300 — for a total of $106,000.
New York –– AP: Cuomo lobbying group loses contributions as state ethics law requires donor disclosure
By Michael GormleyALBANY — Donations for a lobbying group that promotes Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s policies dropped from $17 million to zero after the state ethics board began requiring that donors be named, a 2012 federal tax filing provided to The Associated Press shows. The business-based Committee to Save New York has funded statewide TV ad blitzes boosting Cuomo’s popularity and has lobbied the Legislature and public to support his proposals. The committee spent millions spinning Cuomo’s image, without requiring the Democrat to touch his own massive campaign account, whose donors must be identified.
Texas –– Odessa American: Seliger’s bill passes House
By Emma PettySen. Kel Seliger’s (R-Amarillo) bill that would require nonprofit organizations to disclose their donors passed in the House on Monday and now moves to the Governor’s desk.SB 346 drew attention several weeks ago when Sen. Dan Patrick (R-Houston) wanted to recall the bill, claiming he did not realize when making his vote prior to the floor action that it would cause a violation of First Amendment rights.
