New from the Institute for Free Speech
Love, Elections, and the Not-So-Almighty Dollar
By Nathan Maxwell
This Valentine’s Day, we’ll storm off to the florists and jewelers in hopes of scoring all the love money can buy – even though that’s, well… none. Because darn it, we think we can buy things that aren’t for sale, and we aren’t stopping for any amount of evidence to the contrary.
What else is new? Naïve political candidates try to buy electoral success all the time. And as we approach the 2022 midterms, it’s a good to remind ourselves just how unsuccessful this strategy can be.
Remember when billionaire Tom Steyer spent $350 million to not even win a single delegate in the 2020 Democratic primary – you know, when he spent more money on TV advertising in South Carolina than the rest of his opponents combined, finished third in the state, and then dropped out?
Congress
The Verge: New algorithm bill could force Facebook to change how the news feed works
By Makena Kelly
A new bipartisan bill, introduced on Wednesday, could mark Congress’ first step toward addressing algorithmic amplification of harmful content. The Social Media NUDGE Act, authored by Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) and Cynthia Lummis (R-WY), would direct the National Science Foundation and the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine to study “content neutral” ways to add friction to content-sharing online.
The bill instructs researchers to identify a number of ways to slow down the spread of harmful content and misinformation, whether through asking users to read an article before sharing it (as Twitter has done) or other measures. The Federal Trade Commission would then codify the recommendations and mandate that social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter put them into practice.
The Media
New York Times: The Times is allowed to publish Project Veritas documents until a full appeal.
By Michael M. Grynbaum
The New York Times is free to publish documents pertaining to the conservative group Project Veritas after a New York State appeals court temporarily stayed an order by a state trial judge that had been denounced by First Amendment advocates and journalism groups.
In a decision made public on Thursday, the appeals court said the order would not be enforced until a formal appeal could be heard. The decision means that, for now, The Times can publish certain documents and will not have to turn over or destroy any copies of the documents in its possession.
Free Expression
Jonathan Turley: Can Joe Rogan Save Free Speech?
The free-fall of free speech has largely been due to greed. Companies see no profit in defending dissenting viewpoints. Now, for the first time, the economics may have actually worked against censorship and for free speech.
Independent Groups
RealClearPolitics: Dark Money Link to Democrats’ Climate Probes
By Susan Crabtree
It was Democrats who nearly a decade ago first labeled the opaque funneling of millions of dollars into various political influence operations “dark money” and railed against the then-GOP-dominated practice.
Over the past two election cycles, however, Democrats have not only caught up but surpassed Republicans in channeling unlimited sums of special interest and billionaire spending through nonprofits that do not disclose their donors’ identities.
Liberal groups and political operatives allied with the Democratic Party have also grown more creative in the types of political influence operations the funds support. A little-noticed dark-money entity created at least three years ago to help Democrats in Congress work more effectively is now drawing scrutiny.
The States
OPB: Rejected campaign finance ideas could have new life in Oregon Senate bill
By Dirk VanderHart
Proposed ballot measures to cap political donations in Oregon face a tough road to the ballot, after Secretary of State Shemia Fagan rejected them on procedural grounds Wednesday.
Now, one prominent state lawmaker says he’ll push his fellow legislators to put a similar proposal before voters themselves.
Senate Majority Leader Rob Wagner, D-Lake Oswego, unveiled an amendment on Thursday that cobbles together elements of several now-defunct proposals from good government groups, labor unions and advocacy organizations.
Running 66 pages, the amendment to Senate Bill 1526 would limit how much candidates, labor unions, political party committees and advocacy groups can accept and give in state elections. It also would set penalties for violating those rules. And the amendment would create a system of public financing for campaigns.
But the amendment also contains a controversial provision, allowing limitless giving for “small donor committees” that accept donations of no more than $250 per person each year. That’s been criticized in the past by Republicans, who fear it will allow labor unions and other groups that historically favor Democrats to have an outsized influence.
Wagner’s amendment also does not include requirements that political ads and so-called “dark money” groups more fully reveal the sources of their funding, which were included in some of the ballot measure proposals the secretary of state rejected.
New York Focus: Hochul Leads Pack of Candidates Who Fail to Disclose Sources of Corporate Cash
By Sam Mellins
The state Board of Elections has failed to enforce a 2019 law requiring campaigns to disclose the identities of the individuals behind certain corporate donations, while campaigns across the state have flouted the law with impunity, an analysis by New York Focus found…
The 2019 law mandates that candidates for office record the owners of all limited liability companies, or LLCs, that contribute to their campaigns, and attribute the contributions to those owners in proportion to how much of the LLC each one owns.
The donations count towards an individual’s legal contribution limit for the year, a rule meant to prevent individuals from using LLCs as an end run around per person contribution caps.
Widespread past funneling of massive anonymous donations through multiple companies helped build momentum for reform.
Associated Press: House GOP members defend defeat of campaign finance reform
By Sarah Rankin
Republican legislators in the Virginia House sought to explain why they voted down a prohibition on using campaign donations for things like home mortgages, vacations and country club memberships, even though the chamber unanimously approved such a ban only last year…
The legislation was similar to what passed the House last year. It met an unexpected end with the 5-3 subcommittee vote last week that tabled bills by a Republican and Democrat after advocates offered testimony.
Nancy Morgan, the coordinator of a grassroots group advocating for campaign finance reform, was stunned, given the House support for such a ban before the Senate spiked it last year.
“This is the lowest-hanging fruit,” she said…
The same Senate panel also defeated on Tuesday a measure from GOP Sen. David Suetterlein that would have tightened up certain pre-election donation reporting requirements and prohibited fundraising during special sessions.
