In the News
Acton Institute: The Holy War on Corporate Politicking
By Rev. Robert A. SiricoAnother report, this one from the Center for Competitive Politics, a Virginia-based First Amendment advocacy group, deftly reveals the activists’ questionable strategies, funding and end game. The Center notes that many of these social justice activists couch their resolutions in language advocating the best interests of the company’s shareholders. Not surprisingly, CCP concludes, these arguments for political disclosure are “in actuality pursuing an ideological agenda unrelated to the profit-maximizing interest of most shareholders.” CCP identifies these gadflies as a “cadre of unions, public pension funds, and activist investors…pursuing actions that would selectively burden American public companies from exercising their First Amendment rights to participate in public dialogue.”The political process only works when all sides are allowed to freely express themselves, a right guaranteed by our Constitution. This is an argument that must be made from secular and spiritual perspectives. Targeting the free speech of political adversaries, under a smoke screen of pious outrage, is not only unjust but immoral.
CCP
Media Watch: WaPo Turning a New Leaf on Disclosure?
By Luke WachobIn the past, the Post has typically given our concerns short shrift, but cast in the light of politicizing your shopping trips, they suddenly seem to realize what has always been true of disclosure: there’s no way to stop activists from using the resultant data to make enemies lists or organize boycott campaigns. There’s no way to stop people from using disclosure data to divide every person, company, and product under the sun into either liberal or conservative camps. There’s no way to stop people from using this private information to politicize every aspect of life.In short, there’s no way to stop the misuse of disclosure information. On top of that, proper use is a rare thing. Disclosure has virtually no marginal benefit on voter knowledge, and academic research has shown that so-called campaign finance “reforms” generally have no impact on corruption and public trust in government. Reporting based on disclosure falls into a number of common traps and tends to mislead and distort rather than clarify and inform. BuyPartisan, or similar services such as MapLight or the Center for Responsive Politics’ OpenSecrets website, are not bugs of disclosure; they are features.If the Post has a problem with that, it ought to re-examine the laws that made them possible. Maybe they will finally realize that while sunlight is great, too much of it is blinding. When disclosure is ubiquitous and instantly accessible, it’s hard not to see politics everywhere you look. That’s not a world the Post wants to live in, and that, at least, we can agree on.
Independent Groups
USA Today: Exclusive: NRA launches anti-Bloomberg ad campaign
By Fredreka Schouten“Michael Bloomberg has declared war on the NRA and our 5 million members,” Chris Cox, executive director of the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action, said in an e-mail. “We will not sit back and let him use his billions of dollars to impose his radical anti-freedom agenda on the American people.”He called Bloomberg “an arrogant hypocrite who thinks he knows best how people should live their lives.”The ads, titled “Insult,” seek to tie Bloomberg’s gun control initiatives to controversial steps he took as mayor, including his effort to ban the sale of jumbo-sized sugary sodas as part of an effort to curb obesity.
AP: Senate control could rest with well-funded women
WASHINGTON — The political tilt of the Senate during President Barack Obama’s final two years in office is likely to hinge on a handful of female contenders in tight and costly races.Donors and fundraisers are catching on.Five female Senate contenders recently created a joint fundraising committee, Blue Senate 2014, to appeal to donors. Separately, former New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg last month wrote a $2 million check to a political committee linked to Emily’s List, the biggest player helping elect women to office.
SCOTUS/Judiciary
Constitutional Law Prof Blog: The Next Campaign Finance Law to Go Down?
By Steven D. SchwinnJudge Christopher R. Cooper (D.D.C.) earlier this week in Rufer v. FEC granted a plaintiff’s motion to send its First Amendment challenge to the restriction on contributions to political parties to the en banc D.C. Circuit for consideration. But in the same ruling, Judge Cooper denied a motion to temporarily enjoin the law.The seemingly mixed ruling means that the court sees the challenge as both including “substantial, non-frivolous constitutional claims that are not clearly foreclosed by Supreme Court precedent” (thus meeting the statutory standard for appointment of an en banc circuit court under FECA) and “in tension with forty years of Supreme Court jurisprudence upholding contribution limits to political parties” (thus failing the likely-to-succeed-on-the-merits standard for a preliminary injunction). In plain language, the ruling seems to reflect the court’s view that while current Supreme Court doctrine supports contribution limits to political parties, that’s likely to change.
Disclosure
Washington Post: Planes, trains and campaign finance reports — the bane of every Senate candidate
By Jaime FullerIn such a red state, Landrieu needs to run something close to a flawless campaign, and ethics violations aren’t really part of that recipe. However, Landrieu is only the latest in a long line of candidates tripped up by the logistics involved in being a member of Congress and a candidate for Congress at the same time.The “This American Life” podcast on campaign finance, “Take the Money and Run for Office,” is a good primer on the lengths Congress goes to to fulfill the restraining order that government has against campaign fundraising. This can entail having representatives walking down the street from their office to make campaign calls for hours before returning to the Capitol to vote. As candidates have needed to raise more money to be competitive, they’ve had to be even more careful to not confuse work and treasure-hunting for donors.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
Courier-Journal: Grimes campaign denies bus rental wrongdoing
By Joseph GerthFederal law requires that campaigns either pay fair-market value for goods and services or they must report discounted rates as in-kind campaign contributions. That said, corporations, like the companies that are part of The Lundergan Group, are prohibited from making campaign contributions and are therefore barred from offering discounts to campaigns.Jonathan Hurst, Grimes’ campaign manager, said the campaign’s lawyer reviewed the agreement to ensure that it was legal and found it to be so. Marc Elias, a lawyer with the firm Perkins Coie, said in a statement that “the campaign obtained quotes for the rental cost of a comparable vehicle from other providers in the Kentucky and regional market, and arrived at a reasonable reimbursement cost.”
The Hill: GOP hits New Hampshire senator for Georgetown fundraiser
By Alexandra JaffeThe new attack,shared first with The Hill, is the GOP’s latest attempt to cast Shaheen as being too busy for her home state. Republicans are attacking the incumbent for having too few town hall meetings in New Hampshire.The attack comes on the heels of news — which the New Hampshire Democratic Party trumpeted — that her likely Republican opponent, Scott Brown, is holding his own out-of-state fundraiser in Tennessee later this month, on the eve of his daughter’s wedding.
The Hill: Biden headed to Conn. for fundraisers
By Justin SinkVice President Biden will head to Connecticut on Wednesday for a pair of fundraisers to help incumbent Gov. Dan Malloy, who is facing a tough battle to retain his job.The vice president will attend an afternoon fundraiser benefiting the Democratic Governors Association at a private home in Greenwich, Conn., the White House said Tuesday.
