In the News
More Soft Money Hard Law: Super PACs: Causes and Effects
Bob Bauer
Professor Bradley Smith has written an exceptionally succinct and well-argued case for super PACs. This author of Unfree Speech: The Folly of Campaign Finance Reform does not neglect to cite “personal freedom” in defense of these organizations, but he challenges their critics on one other level: their effects on the electoral process. He argues that super PAC spending improves turnout and competition, lessens the fundraising burden on candidates, and addresses other issues in the political system, such as the early primary states’ grip on the nominating process. Whatever else one may think about all this money, he writes, we should see Super PACs as beneficial – – doing good things for the political process.
There are points of major interest in Smith’s presentation, which are found in both what he says and what he does not.”
CCP
Comments to FEC regarding the Petition for Rulemaking on Federal Contractors
Eric Wang
CCP urges the Commission to deny the Petition. The rulemaking sought by the Petition would address primarily the very narrow issue of whether contributions to super PACs may be made by a corporate entity which has affiliates, subsidiaries, or parents that are federal contractors. Given that the constitutionality of the prohibition against federal contractor contributions, as applied to contributions to super PACs, is highly suspect and is likely to be invalidated if challenged in court, any rulemaking the Commission undertakes regarding this issue is likely to be a superfluous exercise.
Moreover, while the Petition attempts to suggest that a rulemaking is necessary because the Commission’s approach to this issue has been vague and unclear, the Commission has been anything but unclear about this issue. It appears that Public Citizen simply dislikes the substantive outcome of the Commission’s determinations regarding this issue. One special interest organization’s subjective disagreement with an agency’s policy, which is not otherwise impermissible, is not a sufficient or compelling rationale for commencing a rulemaking.
Independent Groups
New York Times: The ‘Non-Candidate’ Money Spigot
The Editorial Board
Mr. Bush’s cynical pretense has netted him the largest dollar haul of the campaign so far, with a reported take of $100 million in super PAC money this year to put him ahead of his rivals. Tactics like his “nondeclaration” have laid bare the Federal Election Commission’s abdication of its responsibility for policing campaign abuses. The bipartisan commission has been rendered “worse than dysfunctional,” in the words of its chairwoman, by party-line standoffs that invite further collusion between candidates and deep-pocketed donors.
Justice Department officials should step in to ensure that the law is being enforced. In February, the Justice Department vowed that it would take a tougher approach after it won the conviction of a campaign operative in Virginia who colluded with an “independent” super PAC in a 2012 congressional race.
Free Speech
RNLA: ‘CREW affiliate attempts to stifle speech in Colorado
Paul Jossey
Last year Colorado Ethics Watch (CEW) used a private-enforcement provision in Colorado’s campaign finance statutes to sue Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO) and Colorado Campaign For Life (CCFL). The alleged illegal activity centered on some mailers sent to Republican primary voters discussing their issues as the election approached. The groups did not engage in “express advocacy”—overt political activity—but merely wished to inform voters of candidate positions during the time they are most likely paying attention.
Courts since Buckley v. Valeo have repeatedly afforded public policy organizations greater relief from campaign finance strictures than straightforward political outfits like candidate committees, parties, and now Super PACs.
Tampa Bay Times: Tampa lawyer sues over anonymous online review in case with First Amendment overtones
Richard Danielson
Thomson’s case has drawn opposition not only from Avvo, but from the nonprofit advocacy group Public Citizen in Washington, D.C. They contend Thomson should have to meet a multi-part test that includes showing she has a legitimate claim that is likely to succeed in order to pierce her critic’s veil of anonymity.
With Amazon, Microsoft and other tech companies based in Washington state, the case is seen as having an impact beyond Avvo.
“This is one of the national tech centers in the country, and the ruling in this case could affect the rights to speak pseudonymously and anonymously on a number of platforms,” said Paul Alan Levy, an attorney for Public Citizen, founded in 1971 by consumer watchdog Ralph Nader. “If it’s too easy to out your critics, the result will be that one side of the debate about the quality of businesses will be suppressed.”
IRS
Fox News: Senator: IRS paying private lawyers $1,000 an hour, despite ‘underfunding’ complaints
FoxNews.com
His letter said the contract inked last year with law firm Quinn Emanuel is worth $2.2 million, and allows for attorneys to reap over $1,000 an hour “to carry out functions that are more properly carried out by Treasury officials.”
The contract reportedly is to help audit Microsoft. The Wall Street Journal reported earlier this month that investigators are looking at whether Microsoft used improper tactics to shift profits offshore and reduce taxes — and the IRS might have turned to the private firm to turn up the pressure.
Harassment
New York Times: Gay Hotelier Who Hosted Ted Cruz Made a Campaign Donation, Too
Maggie Haberman and Jacob Bernstein
Mr. Reisner and Mr. Weiderpass have been doing damage control for over a month since the dinner, which made them pariahs in New York City’s gay rights community in which they’d been figures for years. As two people who have rarely donated politically, they seemed surprised by the reaction, stressing they were drawn to Mr. Cruz because of their mutual interests in foreign policy. Mr. Reisner repeatedly insisted he was unaware of Mr. Cruz’s strident views against same-sex marriage, and has since apologized and denounced the Texas lawmaker.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
New York Times: Democrats Seek a Richer Roster to Match G.O.P.
Eric Lichtblau and Nicholas Confessore
The leading super PAC backing Mrs. Clinton, Priorities USA Action, has won commitments of only about $15 million so far, Democrats involved with the group’s fund-raising said. And while the absence of a competitive race for the Democratic nomination gives Mrs. Clinton more time to catch up with Republican rivals, her allies are planning to push the party’s wealthiest donors for more money than most of them have ever given.
In planning sessions and one-on-one meetings with donors, Mr. Ickes, who is a Priorities USA board member, and other Clinton supporters are discussing how to raise as much as $300 million for Democratic outside groups. That is almost twice as much as Democratic super PACs and other outside groups spent to help re-elect President Obama in 2012, when conservative super PACs far outspent liberal ones.
Washington Post: Rand’s ready to rumble … in a WWE-style ad slamming his GOP rivals
Katie Zezima
The video cuts to Paul’s head superimposed on the torso of a jacked, shirtless man standing in front of an American flag. A cloud of flames explodes in back of him.
He’s taking on President Obama or, his wrestling name, “Obama the email reader.” He is aided by his “so-called conservative” sidekicks — and here comes the Republican-on-Republican violence.
The States
Albany Times Union: JCOPE’s new guidelines: You might be a lobbyist if …
Chris Bragg
A growing class of New York political consultants who enjoy close ties to elected officials but don’t register as lobbyists may well have to start doing so, in light of a proposed guidance issued Wednesday by the state’s ethics watchdog panel.
The Joint Commission on Public Ethics clarified that political consultants who take certain actions related to lobbying efforts must register, even if they don’t directly ask lawmakers or agencies to take actions on bills or regulations.
Hartford Courant: House Gives Bipartisan Approval To Campaign Finance Bill; Senate Dems ‘Have Concerns’
Jenny Wilson
The state House of Representatives has approved legislation that overhauls Connecticut’s public financing system by cutting the size of candidates’ grants and by limiting wealthy donors’ ability to funnel money into campaigns.
The Republican proposal, introduced as an amendment that substituted a different bill, cleared the Democrat-controlled House late Thursday in a bipartisan vote of 134-12. It now goes to the state Senate, where one lawmaker is a direct target of the legislation.
San Francisco Chronicle: Number of campaign finance violations in New Mexico unclear’
Associated Press
Just a few months after announcing a task force to overhaul campaign finance practices in New Mexico, state officials are still not clear on how many violations are being investigated.
