Daily Media Links 7/2: Solution to super PACs: More money, Theories of Speech and Policy, and more…

July 2, 2013   •  By Joe Trotter   •  
Default Article
Independent Groups
 
Politico: Solution to super PACs: More money 
By CPI’s Adam Wollner
In hopes of gaining greater control over their campaigns, some state lawmakers are pushing to allow candidates and parties to raise more funds while, in a few cases, imposing new restrictions on independent groups.
In March, Wyoming became the first state to ease restrictions on campaign contributions, raising limits from $1,000 to $1,500 for local candidates and to $2,500 for statewide candidates. The legislation also placed a cap on donations to candidates from political action committees, which previously had no limit.
Read more…
 
Politifact: Did 1913 Revenue Act prohibit political organizations from claiming tax exempt status? 
We’re truncating here, but you get the picture: Groups dedicated to civic benevolence did not have to pay federal tax, so long as private individuals did not profit. There is no mention of political activity, whether it’s prohibited or not. There is little explanation for why this exemption existed.  
Read more…
 

Disclosure

 
Washington Post: How 31,385 people fund national elections 
By Chris Cillizza
It shows that the 31,385 people who qualify as the one percent of the one percent of political donors wouldn’t even come close to filling a football stadium. And, their seats would cost a minimum of $12,950, the smallest contribution amount of any of the one-tenth-of-one-percenters.  
 

Candidates, Politicians and Parties

 
More Soft Money Hard Law: Theories of Speech and Policy Preference
By Bob Bauer
When Senator McConnell recently and aggressively needled Norm Ornstein at an AEI event, the coverage first settled on the jibe, and then, a little later, on the Senator’s denial that his position skeptical of campaign finance disclosure had changed for 25 years. All interesting or entertaining enough, but the Senator said more about his objections to campaign finance regulation—all government involvement in campaign finance, including disclosure and public financing—and it is well worth close attention. 
 

FEC

 
Bloomberg: No Joke: FEC Fines Roseanne Barr’s Presidential Campaign  
By Jonathan Salant
Barr wound up raising about $56,000 for her campaign, with all but about $10,000 from her own pocket. 
The FEC fine is for failing to file her financial reports on time. 
 
State and Local
 
District of Columbia –– Washington Post: Public campaign financing in D.C.? No, thanks. 
By Jonetta Rose Barras
Quick survey: Which of these D.C.-politicos-turned-felons do you think would have been worthy of taxpayers’ hard-earned dollars or dimes: Harry Thomas Jr., Michael A. Brown or Kwame Brown?
How about scandal-plagued council members Jim Graham (D-Ward 1), Vincent B. Orange(D-At Large) or Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) or Mayor Vincent C. Gray (D)?
None, right?
 
Montana –– AP: New political practices commissioner girds for decisions on campaign financing 
Court battles continue over the state’s contribution limits, the requirements for disclosure and other related issues. It has resulted in more than half-a-dozen complaints that ask the commissioner of political practices to sort out various details dealing with disclosure of spending.  
 

Joe Trotter

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap