CCP
On First Amendment Issues, 2016 Party Platforms Differ Greatly from Each Other, But also from 2012
Joe Albanese
In short, it appears that the two platforms could not be more different. This election features “Big money is drowning out the voices of everyday Americans” on the left versus “Freedom of speech includes the right to devote resources to whatever cause or candidate one supports” on the right. But comparing each platform this year with those from 2012 provides another perspective.
In doing so, it is easy to see how dramatic the Democrats’ newfound embrace of political speech regulations is. That section went from two paragraphs in 2012 to three this year, while total references to Citizens United went from one to three (all of those mentions appear in separate sections of the platform). The Party’s 2012 platform expressed broad, nonspecific support for campaign finance reform and “greater disclosure of campaign spending.” Most references to specific policy simply restate actions that had already been taken: President Obama’s Executive Order on ethics rules for lobbyists, and the national Democratic Party’s refusal of contributions from federal lobbyists (a policy that has since been rescinded). That platform also hedged its speech regulatory ambitions by saying it would support a constitutional amendment “if necessary.”
The Democrats’ 2016 platform elevates the issue to another level.
Free Speech
Washington Post: Wearing ‘Don’t Tread on Me’ insignia could be punishable racial harassment
Eugene Volokh
Let’s think about how this plays out in the workplace. Imagine that you are a reasonable employer. You don’t want to restrict employee speech any more than is necessary, but you also don’t want to face the risk of legal liability for allowing speech that the government might label “harassing.” An employee comes to you, complaining that a coworker’s wearing a “Don’t Tread on Me” cap — or having an “All Lives Matter” bumper sticker on a car parked in the employee lot, or “Stop Illegal Immigration” sign on the coworker’s cubicle wall — constitutes legally actionable “hostile environment harassment,” in violation of federal employment law. The employee claims that in “the specific context” (perhaps based on what has been in the news, or based on what other employees have been saying in lunchroom conversations), this speech is “racially tinged” or “racially insensitive.”
Would you feel pressured, by the risk of a lawsuit and of liability, into suppressing speech that expresses such viewpoints?
Salon: The troubling and counterproductive trend of liberals policing free speech: We cannot silence those we disagree with
Matthew Rozsa and Mark Schierbecker
This is the main lesson we must learn from the events of 2016. There is a fundamental truth about political debate that seems to have been lost – namely, that there is a difference between the specific ideas you’re supporting in a conversation and the ethics you practice in how you conduct that discussion. Regardless of whether you’re left-wing, right-wing, or anything else under the sun, it is imperative to respect the right of others to express views that are different from your own… even if those opinions, or the language with which they are conveyed, is offensive to you. Not only does this guarantee that your own right to expression will be protected if others find your ideas offensive, but it creates a climate that stimulates creative thought instead of stifling it. This should be true wherever a political debate is being held– on the Internet, at a university campus, or anywhere else.
Independent Groups
Reuters: In slap at Trump, some wealthy Republicans campaign for Clinton
Olivia Oran and Amanda Becker
Groups of wealthy Republicans unhappy with Donald Trump have been privately courting prominent peers to join them in backing Democrat Hillary Clinton’s U.S. presidential bid, several people involved in the effort told Reuters…
Groups formed to support Clinton include Republicans for Her 2016, run by Republican lobbyist Craig Snyder; a grassroots organization called R4C16, led by John Stubbs and Ricardo Reyes, officials in former President George W. Bush’s administration; and the Republican Women for Hillary group co-led by Jennifer Pierotti Lim, an official at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
The first two groups are acting independently of Clinton’s own effort. The third is acting in concert with her campaign.
Buzzfeed: Republican Donors Panic As Trump Melts Down
Tarini Parti and Rosie Gray
“I don’t know what he’s doing — trying to commit suicide?” said Stan Hubbard, a Minnesota-based top donor to a pro-Trump super PAC. Hubbard has been trying to get other Republican donors, including Charles and David Koch, on board with Donald Trump for months.
But he said Trump’s recent comments, in particular those about the parents of a Muslim American soldier who died in the Iraq War, were “just nonsense,” adding that he sent Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus a note pleading with him to do something. “The whole world is laughing at that. It’s just very frustrating.”
The Courts
More Soft Money Hard Law: The Courts and Election Law: The Divergent Fortunes of Crawford (Voter ID) and Citizens United (Super PACs)
Bob Bauer
The Court emphasizes that it is not challenging the legitimacy of the government’s purpose in avoiding voter confusion. But a benign or worthy purpose cannot, in its view, raise elevate transparency requirement beyond the extra-constitutional level and justify a limit on content-based speech. From a regulatory perspective, the result is that the government must resort to second-best disclosure—less effective transparency, and a higher risk of risk of voter confusion. So be it, the Court holds: the speech right trumps the disclosure value, and the government has to live with second-best.
Influence
Washington Examiner: Hillary’s campaign denies FBI, IRS investigations into Clinton Foundation
Sarah Westwood
“There’s no basis to believe that. I have no knowledge of that,” Brian Fallon said Wednesday evening during an appearance on Fox News.
“There’s no evidence to that effect,” he added, calling reports about the investigation “baseless.”
FBI Director James Comey dodged questions last month about whether a reported probe of the Clinton Foundation had concluded with the investigation into Clinton’s private emails, which closed on July 6 without yielding criminal charges for anyone involved.
Candidates and Campaigns
Washington Post: Showing growing confidence, Clinton campaign and super PAC pause ads in Colorado and Virginia
Abby Philip
Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign and the super PAC supporting it have removed its state-specific ads in two battleground states, Virginia and Colorado, a sign of growing confidence in her position in the presidential race after both party’s conventions.
According to a Democrat tracking media buys, the Clinton campaign has renewed its ad buys in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Nevada, Florida, Iowa, New Hampshire, and North Carolina. But it allowed its state-specific ads in Virginia and Colorado to lapse, though it is still airing ads on national during the Olympics.
Buzzfeed: Trump Super PAC Head: Trump Watches Too Much TV, Is Easily Distracted
Nathan McDermott
“I think one of Donald Trump’s singular difficulties with this campaign is that he sits and watches TV all day long and feels he has to react to every single thing that’s said against him,” Rollins said today on Kilmeade and Friends when asked how he thought Trump was handling criticism leveled at him by Khizr and Ghazala Khan, the parents of a slain Muslim American soldier.
Rollins went on to compare Trump to an easily distracted race horse.
“Sometimes great racehorses can’t stay on the track, they wander all over the place, they have to put blinder on them. We need to put a blinder on Donald Trump and his focus needs to be on Mrs. Clinton. And any other Republican, he just leaves alone.”
New Republic: Little Tim Kaine Is the Big Donors’ Best Friend
David Dayen
The Clinton campaign has endorsed a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, and other campaign finance reform steps. But they’re also sending Tim Kaine out to do a big-money fundraiser per day. Nobody suggests they should unilaterally disarm while Donald Trump rakes in cash. But it does suggest that it will be difficult to wean Clinton and Kaine off the current system of money in politics, and all the compromises that implies. They are too good at working it.
Mic.com: Donald Trump’s Campaign Website Won’t Let You Cancel Recurring Donations
James Dennin
As the screenshots below demonstrate, there is no option on Trump’s website to cancel monthly contributions or remove your credit card information: Once you’ve set up a donation, you may only switch from one valid credit card to another.
On Wednesday, CNN reporter Jeremy Diamond tweeted a screenshot of an email from a disenchanted Trump donor who alleged that the campaign has not returned voice message requests to cancel contributions (The identity of the alleged donor is not shown).
The States
KXRO Aberdeen: Ballot on campaign finance reform coming to voters
Assistant Secretary of State Mark Neary certified Initiative 1464 after a signature check crew at the Elections Division finished reviewing signatures submitted by the sponsors.
I-1464 is the fourth and final Initiative to the People that has qualified for the Washington statewide ballot.
South Dakota Public Radio: Secretary of State Reviews Campaign Finance Law
Lee Strubinger
“That’s one of the reasons why I want to look at that right now. A PAC is limited to $10,000 per PAC for a candidate. And what ends up happening some time is that maybe several PACs are formed to give one candidate more than $10,000, and so, we want to just say if there’s all this money coming in, we want to know who it’s coming from so we don’t have to track it down by different PACs being formed in order to siphon that money in different ways.”
Krebs says she wants to hear from South Dakotans about ways to reform campaign finance laws in the state. She says the public can call or email the secretary of state’s office with feedback or ideas.
