Independent Groups
More Soft Money Hard Law: “Drop-In” Issue Advocacy in Election Seasons and The Disclosure Alternatives
By Bob BauerJust before the turn of the year, the Tenth Circuit decided that Citizens United, the organization, was entitled to the Colorado campaign finance law’s press exemption and so was not required to file public financial reports when producing and distributing a political documentary. Citizens United v. Gessler, 773 F.3d 200 (10thCir. 2014). Colorado has construed the exemption broadly to apply to online publications and bloggers as well as to print and traditional media outlets. But the State urged that the Court distinguish between entities about which the voters know or could easily learn something, and those hiding behind empty names lacking cue or content and having no extended operating history that listeners or views could consult for useful information. The latter organizations—the “Citizens for a Better America” or “People for Justice” —are engaged in what it termed called “drop-in advocacy” during election seasons.The Court, impressed with the distinction, still rejected its application to Citizens United. CU was well known; there was ample information available to anyone caring to seek it out, and the informational interest of voters was adequately protected. On its reading of Citizens United, the Court emphasized the interest supporting disclosure as the voters’ informational interest, not the deterrence of “corruption” or its appearance.This raises the question: for purposes of the disclosure requirements based on the voter’s informational interest, is it possible to distinguish between an ongoing enterprise of known purpose and the shadowy “drop-in” advocacy group which is often here today and gone tomorrow? And if it is, is that interest served primarily by disclosure of donors, or by other information about its organization and purposes?
NY Times: Obama Grass-Roots Group Trying to Find a Role for 2016
By Maggie HabermanThe remnants of President Obama’s grass-roots campaign apparatus, Organizing for Action, have been in a period of flux in the last month as the organization tries to find a place among Democratic groups heading into 2016.Recent discussions among Organizing for Action officials and board members have centered on the group’s future, according to three people familiar with the discussions, after two years in which it struggled to become a force in pushing Mr. Obama’s agenda.Within the last month, a number of possibilities have been discussed among the board members, including whether to wind down the group entirely, according to people briefed on the discussions.
Bloomberg: The ‘Super PAC to End Super PACs’ Makes a Strategic Retreat
By David WeigelThe problem came when the voters got to vote. A cash infusion into Scott Brown’s GOP primary did not prevent him from winning it. A surprise seven-figure surgeinto South Dakota’s four-way Senate race roused the party committees, which counter-attacked and bailed out now-Senator Mike Rounds by comparing Democrat Rick Weiland to President Obama.“That was a difficult one to win, in retrospect.”And so, in this weekend’s Medium post, Lessig announced that Mayday would not just raise money to buy ads and swing elections. He envisioned “a crowd-sourced project to identify possible allies in Congress” and “a platform that we have been building to engage citizens as lobbyists.” Upshot: Mayday would not play kingmaker in elections the way it had in 2014, because that didn’t work.
Disclosure
The Hill: Broadcasters want FCC enforcement changes for ad disclosure rules
By Mario TrujilloIn a filing, the NAB said the commission should consider only allowing local viewers to file complaints when broadcasters fail to fully comply. The change could make it harder for watchdog organizations to make their own complaints when stations fail to properly disclose the information.The NAB said the commission should reconsider its enforcement priorities to reflect the “concerns of local viewers and listeners, rather than the agendas of national advocacy groups unrelated to local communities.”“It would also reduce spurious allegations against stations, discourage the filing of mass electronic complaints made possible by today’s technology, and conserve the FCC’s limited resources for addressing valid and more locally relevant complaints,” the NAB wrote in the letter.
Political Targeting
Wisconsin Reporter: John Doe target says they are the victim of identity theft
By M.D. KittleAt present, there is no way to independently confirm that someone involved in the John Doe investigation either used the individuals’ identification in filing the phony tax return or failed to protect it, but the incident does raise questions about the integrity of the security of the seized personal information.The target of the John Doe probe told Wisconsin Reporter they will likely “never know the extent to which their information was disclosed or the identities of all those with access.”A lot of people’s lives — their personal/financial information — are in the hands of the prosecutors and their assistants who have targeted dozens of conservative organizations and the campaign of Gov. Scott Walker in a lengthy campaign finance investigation. Critics claim the John Doe probe is nothing more than a political witch hunt, launched in September 2012 by Milwaukee County District Attorney John Chisholm, a Democrat.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
NY Times: Today in Politics: As Hillary Clinton Tests the Waters, Who Pays?
By Maggie HabermanHillary Rodham Clinton has a growing team of campaign staff members-to-be, but how some of them are getting paid has been something of a mystery.The answer is not so simple.Some salaries are being paid personally by Mrs. Clinton, as has been the case for a small handful of aides for the last two years. Newer additions are volunteering their time. And some are attached to their current jobs, such as the expected campaign communications director, Jennifer Palmieri, who has that title at the White House.
National Journal: When It Pays to Pretend You’re Not Running for President
By Shane GoldmacherMarch 16, 2015 It seemed, for about 80 minutes at least, that Sen. Rand Paul had tweeted the truth, and acknowledged himself as a 2016 presidential candidate. “I’m the only candidate who thinks the NSA program on phone records should be shut down,” he declared. The legalistic walk-back soon followed: “I am a candidate … For the U.S. Senate,” Paul followed up unconvincingly.The brief Twitter blip Sunday evening was just the latest in a series of verbal acrobatics that the expected 2016 field has been performing to avoid calling themselves candidates. Big-name politicians have hired Iowa operatives and New Hampshire advisers, lined up pollsters and finance chairmen, travelled the country, and solicited checks. None of them, however, has declared himself or herself as 2016 candidates, and only a handful have even acknowledged legally “testing the waters” for a run.“It seems there’s no better way to kick off a campaign than to deny you’re a candidate,” said Kenneth Gross, a veteran elections lawyer at Skadden Arps.
Ethics
AP: Sudden fall: Illinois Rep. Aaron Schock is resigning
Since Schock doesn’t plan to formally resign until March 31, the Office of Congressional Ethics could still refer its findings before then to the Justice Department’s Office of Public Integrity or the Federal Election Commission for possible civil sanctions. Once his resignation becomes final, congressional investigators would lose jurisdiction in the case.The office-redecoration expenses prompted an ethics complaint from a private Washington watchdog group and set off a flurry of reporting on Schock’s spending and reliance on political donors.An AP examination of his frequent use of air flights around his central Illinois district found that he spent more than $40,000 from his House expenses for travel on planes owned by a group of political donors.
Politico: Aaron Schock resigns after new questions about mileage expenses
By Jake Sherman, Anna Palmer and John BresnahanIllinois Rep. Aaron Schock resigned Tuesday, less than 12 hours after POLITICO raised questions about tens of thousands of dollars in mileage reimbursements he received for his personal vehicle.Schock billed the federal government and his campaign for logging roughly 170,000 miles on his personal car from January 2010 through July 2014. But when he sold that Chevrolet Tahoe in July 2014, it had roughly 80,000 miles on the odometer, according to public records obtained by POLITICO under Illinois open records laws. The documents, in other words, indicate he was reimbursed for 90,000 miles more than his car was driven.The discrepancy added to a growing wave of ethical and legal problems for the 33-year-old politician.
CPI: Aaron Schock still gets taxpayer-funded pension
By Carrie LevineRep. Aaron Schock, who announced his resignation today under suspicion of misusing public money, will be eligible for more of it in retirement.Schock, a Republican from Illinois, could eventually collect hundreds of thousands of dollars in taxpayer-funded retirement benefits, depending on how long he lives.Starting at age 62, he will be eligible for just under $18,500 annually, according to estimates by the National Taxpayers Union, a conservative nonprofit organization.
State and Local
Maryland –– AP: Md. House OKs public campaign financing bill
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — The Maryland House of Delegates has voted to bring back a voluntary check off on individual income tax returns for public campaign financing for governor.The House voted 134-6 on Tuesday for the bill, which was proposed by Republican Gov. Larry Hogan.The original check off was repealed in 2010.
