In the News
USA Today: The IRS can still silence political dissent
Allison R. Hayward
Two years ago, Lois Lerner of the IRS revealed that it unfairly targeted and delayed Tea Party applications for tax exemption. While the IRS has apologized and promised reform, the agency has not fixed the vague rules that allowed this scandal to happen. As we enter the 2016 election cycle, political activists remain in danger of selective IRS audits, penalties and approvals.
As troubling as this is, we have seen this before. The tax regulation of non-profit advocacy groups has not had a happy history. One pattern repeats: Congress passes a tax law, often to score short-term political points. The IRS then interprets the law aggressively, often against groups with controversial views. Federal courts may soften that blow case by case. Eventually, Congress passes another law and this cycle starts again.
CCP
Lawmakers Oppose Government Data Collection for NSA, but Not for FEC
CCP Press
“Lawmakers are right to worry about big government databases, but it’s time more started showing concern about protecting the political opinions of Americans,” said CCP President David Keating. “If violating the privacy of millions of Americans is not justified in matters of national security, it certainly is an extreme overreach in the enforcement of obscure and speech-stifling campaign finance laws. Today, contributions of just $17 a month to a candidate, political party, or PAC can put you in this massive speech-tracking database.”
During the ongoing debate over renewing sections of the current Patriot Act, several lawmakers have argued persuasively against this type of bulk data collection:
Sen. Angus King (I-ME) said, “Well, I can tell you my problem, I’ve always been one that’s been uncomfortable with all of this data being held by the government, even though there are a lot of protections and a lot of standards and very few people have access to it. It just makes me nervous that the government has this big trove of data.”
FEC
Reuters: FEC members attempt to curb donations
Alana Wise
Ravel echoed that sentiment, noting similar past efforts have been shut down by fellow committee members before they reach the public. “If I were to do this through the rules committee, my fellow committee members could say ‘no, this is never going to go anywhere,’ which they have said in the past,” Ravel told Reuters.
The petition will not force the commission to pen any rules regulating election fundraising, but Ravel expects it to open public discourse on the issue and cast a light on the unrestricted and sometimes anonymous money that is flooding elections.
CNN: FEC chairwoman petitions her own agency
Theodore Schleifer
“People will say: ‘You’re the chair of the commission. You should work from within.’ I tried,” Ravel told CNN Monday. “We needed to take more creative avenues to try and get public disclosure.”
Petitions are almost always filed by outsiders hoping to change policy. The FEC chief now counts herself as one of those outsiders.
While a petition — even one from the chair of the body — won’t change the FEC’s power, Ravel explained her hope is to draw attention to its impotence. Some campaign-reform groups have essentially given up on the FEC’s ability to police elections, turning instead recently to the Department of Justice to more effectively punish violators.
More Soft Money Hard Law: “Desperate” at the FEC
Bob Bauer
In this respect, the Petition is surprising. It makes a fairly routine pass at the issues that are being mulled over in the press and among commentators, and the advocacy here does not depart significantly from the standard output. There are references to “dark money” but no explanation of what exactly they have in mind. And it is unclear why the Supreme Court is said to have “directed” the promulgation or enforcement of disclosure requirements. This line of argument, which has come up before, would also have Citizens United understood to be the source of both woe and salvation. On this view, the Supreme Court in CU took constitutional theory in an abominable direction, causing all sorts of problems, and yet we should listen closely to what the Justices would like us to do next.
Washington Examiner: FEC Dems move to punish GOP PACs, help Clinton, in major flip-flop
Paul Bedard
In 2011, Democrats on the FEC pushed for a rule that candidates can and should help Democratic super PACs raise money. It was unanimously approved.
The bid by Ravel and Weintraub could hurt ongoing fundraising efforts by Jeb Bush, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz and other Republicans who have had success soliciting funds for friendly super PACs.
Since the agency is politically split between three Democrats and three Republicans, it is unlikely that the petition will be agreed to.
Theirs is just the latest attack on Republicans. At a recent FEC meeting, Republican Lee E. Goodman noted that the Democratic-chaired agency has been resolving far more cases against Republicans than Democrats, by a ratio of 24-9. What’s more, there are 49 cases against Republicans to just 16 against Democrats queued up for further action.
Mother Jones: Top Campaign Watchdog Petitions Her Own Agency to Do Its Job
Russ Choma
Ravel was most recently the chairwoman of the California Fair Political Practices Commission, where she attracted national headlines for busting a dark-money group with ties to the Koch brothers that funneled money into two contentious ballot measures, forcing them to reveal details on their donors. But Washington hasn’t been as easy of a nut to crack for Ravel. Last month, she told the New York Times that she believes the 2016 election will essentially be an election with no rules.
“The likelihood of the laws being enforced is slim,” Ann M. Ravel, the chairwoman, said in an interview. “I never want to give up, but I’m not under any illusions. People think the F.E.C. is dysfunctional. It’s worse than dysfunctional.”
Campaign Finance
Medium: Frodo Baggins for President
Lawrence Lessig
Imagine a different kind of candidate for president: A prominent, well-liked leader, possibly not even a current politician (Colin Powell, Bill Bradley, David Walker, Bill Gates, Christine Todd Whitman, Jerry Brown, Joe Scarborough, Robert Reich), who declares her candidacy for President, and makes one single promise: that if elected, she would use every power of the executive to get Congress to enact fundamental reform, and once enacted, she will resign, leaving the elected Vice President to fill out her term. That may take a day, or a week, or as long as it takes to defeat obstructionists. But when reform was enacted, the president would go.
Huffington Post: A New Hope for 2016: @Lessig for #President
Cenk Uygur
Lessig used a fun analogy in his recent article about this — we need a Frodo Baggins to run for President, who would throw the ring back into the fire. But there is one thing he did not address: Who do you trust to be Frodo Baggins? We’re all afraid that professional politicians would hold on to that ring of power with all of their might while screaming, “The Precious!!!”
So, I’m here to solve that problem. The candidate should be Larry Lessig himself! He is the godfather of the movement for free and fair elections. He is the coder who can fix the bug in the system. He is the one guy we can trust to actually keep his word, get this done, and then hand off the reins of power. He is not going to be seduced by the imperative to pass a transportation bill with important pork barrel spending in it. He will hold the fort down until Congress has fixed this issue. He will be the “Citizen President”. He will be our president.
Roll Call: Return to Sender? House Rules May Thwart Delivery of Doug Hughes’ Letter
Hannah Hess
Compared to Hughes’ first delivery attempt on April 15, when he strapped a U.S. Postal Service bin full of letters to his landing gear and piloted a gyrocopter from Pennsylvania to the West Front of the Capitol, Lane’s venture is “about as straightforward as can be in a representative democracy,” the author and moviemaker said during a June 5 phone interview.
But Capitol Police are warning his plan still violates congressional rules, Lane told CQ Roll Call.
WDIO: Nolan Proposing Campaign Finance Reform, Limits to Campaign Season
Heidi Ennings
The first of the seven provision asks congress to pass a constitutional amendment overturning a Supreme Court decision saying corporate campaign money falls under “free speech.”
Another provision would limit the campaign season by restricting campaign spending to no more than 60 days before a primary or general election and by banning candidates from raising money while Congress is in session.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
Washington Post: Super PAC backing Jeb Bush unlikely to hit $100 million by end of June
Matea Gold and Tom Hamburger
While his aides never publicly declared that the super PAC would hit $100 million, they did little to tamp down such predictions — and in some cases privately fueled them, according to top GOP fundraisers.
Mike Murphy, the strategist overseeing the super PAC, declined to comment, except to say: “At the right time, we will release very formidable numbers.”
The States
CBS News: State leaders seek to shine light on election spending
Stephanie Condon
“If we don’t address this issue, I think it will just be a matter of time before high net-worth contributors don’t give directly to [political action committees], they’ll simply write their checks to 501(c)(4)s because they can do so anonymously,” Cook said. “That really has a corrupting effect on the democratic process.”
Cook led a bill through the Texas state House that would have required those “social welfare” groups disclose the names of donors who contributed at least $2,000 specifically for campaign expenditures. The bill passed with overwhelming bipartisan support in the state House, but it died in the state Senate just before the legislative session ended.
Boston Globe: Baker, state GOP’s use of federal funds questioned
Frank Phillips
Since Baker took office in January, his campaign committee has used the state GOP staff and its headquarters to solicit, collect, and organize donations at events to bulk up his depleted political account, according to several party officials and others involved in the fund-raising for the governor.
The staff and office rent are paid with money from the party’s federal account, according to the GOP’s federal campaign finance reports. That staff has helped to collect $550,000 for Baker since January, records show.
