CCP
Lawsuit challenges McCain-Feingold disclosure law
The Center for Competitive Politics today filed two lawsuits on behalf of a Colorado think tank saying that similar state and federal campaign finance disclosure laws are unconstitutional under the First Amendment.The Independence Institute wishes to run two ads: one asking Colorado Senators Mark Udall and Michael Bennett to support a federal sentencing reform bill, and one asking citizens to contact Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper and urge him to initiate an audit of the Colorado Health Benefit Exchange. The McCain-Feingold law, along with a similar state statute, effectively prevents the group from raising money for the ads.“This situation shows the damage to free speech caused by carelessly written campaign finance laws” said David Keating, president of CCP. “Instead of advocacy on an important public issue, there will be silence. That’s unacceptable under the First Amendment, and is the reason why we filed this lawsuit.Colorado and federal law treat speech about public issues as campaign speech whenever a candidate is mentioned in a broadcast ad within 60 days of the general election. Groups must either file public reports with personal details about donors who have provided funds for the ads, or refrain from speaking. The result is what First Amendment advocates call a “chilling” effect on advocacy, depriving the public of important speech about issues of public importance.
The value of an endorsement
By Brad SmithNo, what’s of greater interest to us is the value of an endorsement from a single state senator – in some cases, apparently, at least $73,000. Note that it is perfectly legal for that state senator can go into a candidate’s office, and say, “I’ll endorse you if you promise to take lawful actions X, Y, and Z… My endorsement is worth upwards of $70,000 in campaign expenditures.” He can then make the endorsement if he is satisfied with the answer he receives. And, of course, it’s perfectly legal for a newspaper editor to make the same type of offer.But if you or I or some local activist or small businessman goes in and says, “I like a lot of your positions, I think your opponent is a crook, and I’m thinking of contributing $3,000 to your campaign, but I want to know first – are you opposed to or in favor of green energy subsidies?” it would be illegal to actually make that $3,000 contribution to the campaign if you were satisfied with the answer received.Strange concept, what many so-called “reformers” view as “undue influence.”
Amending the First Amendment
Washington Examiner: Harry Reid’s anti-Koch crusade eats up precious Senate time
By BYRON YORKA long debate will then ensue in which Democrats denounce the Kochs and “corporate money” and Republicans argue the amendment would abridge First Amendment rights. After an extended back-and-forth, there will be another vote, this time on whether to end debate. Again, Republicans don’t need to use the filibuster to stop the measure, because they know it will fail in the final vote.After more pointless debate, there will be yet another vote to move toward a final vote on the matter. If the amendment goes on to that final vote, and even if all 55 Democrats ultimately support it, it will fall a dozen votes short of passage.And what will have been accomplished? Yes, Reid and fellow Democrats will have gotten a few more days to denounce the Kochs. But the issues the Senate might have addressed — not just government funding, but the urgent crises in Iraq and Syria, not to mention continuing problems along the U.S. southwestern border — will be squeezed into a mad, and probably unproductive, final rush. Is Reid’s anti-Koch crusade really worth it?
Independent Groups
NY Times: Kochs’ Network Wrestles With Expectations for Presidential Primaries
By Nicholas ConfessoreDALLAS — The network overseen by Charles G. and David H. Koch has knocked on the doors of a million voters this year, elbowed aside some of the Republican Party’s top strategists and built one of the biggest fund-raising operations in politics.But as 3,000 activists, dozens of big donors and a gaggle of presidential aspirants gathered here for a pre-election conference held by the network’s flagship political organization, Americans for Prosperity, the Kochs’ political operation is confronting the anxieties of influence.
The Hill: Unions open coffers as Senate teeters
By Benjamin GoadOrganized labor is pouring millions of dollars into congressional campaign coffers, as unions press to stave off a Senate flip this fall that could spell disaster for its policy agenda during the final years of the Obama administration.
Corporate Governance
Harvard: The Tension Between Conservative Corporate Law Theory and Citizens United
By Kobi KastielThe abstract of Chief Justice Strine’s and Walter’s essay summarizes it briefly as follows:One important aspect of Citizens United has been overlooked: the tension between the conservative majority’s view of for-profit corporations, and the theory of for-profit corporations embraced by conservative thinkers. This article explores the tension between these conservative schools of thought and shows that Citizens United may unwittingly strengthen the arguments of conservative corporate theory’s principal rival.Citizens United posits that stockholders of for-profit corporations can constrain corporate political spending and that corporations can legitimately engage in political spending. Conservative corporate theory is premised on the contrary assumptions that stockholders are poorly-positioned to monitor corporate managers for even their fidelity to a profit maximization principle, and that corporate managers have no legitimate ability to reconcile stockholders’ diverse political views. Because stockholders invest in for-profit corporations for financial gain, and not to express political or moral values, conservative corporate theory argues that corporate managers should focus solely on stockholder wealth maximization and non-stockholder constituencies and society should rely upon government regulation to protect against corporate overreaching. Conservative corporate theory’s recognition that corporations lack legitimacy in this area has been strengthened by market developments that Citizens United slighted: that most humans invest in the equity markets through mutual funds under section 401(k) plans, cannot exit these investments as a practical matter, and lack any rational ability to influence how corporations spend in the political process.
Gov. Perry Indictment
The Hill: Indictment ‘difficult’ for Perry, DeLay says
By Martin MatishakThe indictments against Texas Governor Rick Perry (R) will make it “difficult” for him and others to focus on his potential presidential bid, former House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas) said Sunday.“It’s going to be difficult … that’s for sure,” DeLay said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”DeLay said that the charges will “especially” hurt Perry with potential donors, who “may wait until this is over to give him the money” or they “may go somewhere else, another candidate.”
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
Politico: Hating on Harry Reid
By Kenneth P. Vogel“Morning after morning, in his assault to finally end the 1 percent, Harry Reid leaves the Ritz-Carlton penthouse in Washington, D.C. where he lives,” Phillips said, referring to Reid’s one-bedroom condo on the second floor of the hotel’s residences, which Reid and his wife bought in 2001 for $750,000. Over chortles of knowing laughter, Phillips continued that Reid “goes down and hops in a chauffeured limousine — thank you, taxpayers, you cover that for him. … He drives to the Senate floor to launch attack after attack after attack.”Affecting a tone of moderate disbelief, Phillips ticked off some of Reid’s greatest hits for the crowd: “Words like ‘evil’ … slurs like ‘un-American.’ Here’s the irony — David and Charles Koch create more prosperity for more Americans in one year than a career politician like Harry Reid creates in a lifetime.”
Washington Post:Wealthy political donors seize on new latitude to give to unlimited candidates
By Matea GoldBut many wealthy donors rejected the notion that the playing field is tilted in their favor.“Baloney,” said Stanley Hubbard, a Minnesota media mogul who largely backs Republicans and conservatives. “The average person can get their friends together and raise small donations that amount to big donations.”
NY Times: How to Buy a Mine in Wisconsin: Did Gov. Scott Walker Violate Campaign Laws?
EditorialThe new documents were released as part of a state investigation into whether Mr. Walker violated Wisconsin campaign laws. Prosecutors have said the timing of the mine approval, following the donation, suggested a clear quid pro quo, a favor in exchange for dollars.“Because Wisconsin Club for Growth’s fund-raising and expenditures were being coordinated with Scott Walker’s agents at the time of Gogebic’s donation,” according to a prosecution statement in the case, “there is certainly an appearance of corruption in light of the resulting legislation from which it benefited.”
State and Local
New York –– AP: New York House candidates tap into their own cash
“When parties are recruiting candidates, they like to see people who have some personal wealth and might be able to put some of their own money in a campaign,” said Viveca Novak of the Center for Responsive Politics, which tracks political money.Wealthy candidates have been relying on their bank accounts since the early days of the republic. But recent spending sometimes reaches lavish levels, like when former eBay CEO Meg Whitman devoted about $144 million of her own money on a losing 2010 run for California governor. Self-funding also is common in lower-stakes House races.
Texas –– Texas Tribune: Analysis: The Hunt for a New Home for Political Watchdog
By Ross RamseySuppose we all agree that investigations and prosecutions of corruption by state officials ought to be taken away from the local prosecutors in Travis County.Skip to the next question: Is there a place where political cases could be handled without any smell of politics?
Wisconsin ––Watchdog.org: Burke opposes out-of-state political contributions – unless they help her campaign
By Adam Tobias“It makes me sick to think that people from outside of the state are going to influence and possibly buy our governorship,” Burke said.Despite those assertions, Burke was ebullient about the Democracy for America endorsement. The group’s pledge comes with the promise that it will seek donations for her campaign and mobilize thousands of volunteers to solicit political contributions “from grassroots progressives in the Badger State and throughout the country.”
Wyoming –– Jackson Hole News & Guide: Wilsonites sue to kill political contribution limit
By Michael PolhamusA Wilson couple have sued the state of Wyoming to strike down limits on how much money donors can give to political candidates during an election cycle.State law prohibits donors from giving more than $25,000 to candidates over a two-year period. Wilson residents Daniel and Carleen Brophy are approaching that limit, and have sued Wyoming Secretary of State Max Maxfield to go beyond it.
