In the News
San Francisco Chronicle: Citizens United is about free speech
By Debra J. Saunders
“It’s become a code word for everything you dislike about politics,” Bradley Smith, former Federal Election Commission chair and now chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics, told me. The public has come to think that a reversal of Citizens United will end the supersize role of money, especially corporate money, in politics. They forget that the 5-4 decision written by Justice Anthony Kennedy denied the government’s authority to censor a political documentary. The conservative group Citizens United had produced an unflattering 90-minute film called, “Hillary: The Movie.” The FEC prohibited the film’s airing on pay-per-view stations to comply with the 2002 McCain-Feingold ban on “electioneering communications” funded by corporations or labor within 30 days of a presidential primary.
If the Big Bench were to overturn Citizens United, Smith added, the court likely will make it “impossible to air a documentary movie close to the election” – whether the filmmaker is Citizens United or Michael Moore – but would not cleanse politics of corporate funds.
Townhall: Show-Me Human Rights
By Paul Jacob
A year ago, the unethical Missouri Ethics Commission fined Ron Calzone $1,000 for not paying a silly $10 fee. To register as a lobbyist. They also ordered him to stop talking to state legislators until he complied.
Citizen Calzone didn’t register. He didn’t pay. And he didn’t shut up. On principle.
Instead, he contacted the Freedom Center of Missouri, co-founded by attorneys Dave and Jennifer Roland, and the Center for Competitive Politics, the national outfit that defends our rights to participate in our supposedly participatory and representative democratic republic.
On Monday, a judge ruled in Ron’s favor, tossing out the “ethics complaint” against him. On a technicality, actually. The complaint hadn’t been filed by a “natural person,” as the law requires, but by the attorney for the Missouri Society of Governmental Consultants, the state lobbyist guild.
Winning is better than losing, of course, but too bad the result did not better bring out and bolster the underlying issue: the critical ability of people to speak to public officials, to agitate, to support and oppose legislation without opening themselves up to government reprisal.
BillMoyers.com: Doing What the Feds Won’t on Corporate Political Disclosure
By Kathy Kiely
A former journalist, Capitol Hill staffer and even (briefly) a lobbyist, Freed 13 years ago started the Center for Political Accountability, a small, Washington-based nonprofit that over the years has managed to persuade, cajole and browbeat some of the nation’s largest corporations into providing some public disclosure of what they’re doing to influence the electoral process…
The work of the David-like Center has drawn opposition, however, from a political goliath: The US Chamber of Commerce (2014 revenues: $206 million), is a critic. A smaller nonprofit (but still with revenues about five times those of Freed’s organization), the Center for Competitive Politics, argues that the Center is in the business of “silencing corporate speech.”
FEC
Daily Caller: FEC Successfully Voted To Maintain Power To Censor Books, Movies
By Eric Lieberman
The Federal Election Commission (FEC) can continue regulating, even censoring, books and movies after a vote to exempt those forms of media content failed 3 to 3.
One of the six commissioners of the FEC, Lee. E. Goodman, proposed an amendment to a regulation in order to modernize the rule to include twenty-first century technology.
“Today [Thursday] at the FEC’s public meeting, I moved to clarify that books, electronic books, motion pictures and streaming films are exempted from FEC regulation under the FEC’s ‘press exemption’ regulation,” Goodman told The Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF).
RNLA: FEC Democrats Vote to Censor Books, Documentary Films
By Michael B. Thielen
After the famous colloquy between Justice Alito and the federal government in the Citizens United case, FEC Democrats still have not learned there are limits on the FEC’s power to restrict free press rights. The vote was on a motion by Commissioner Lee Goodman to add books and films under the categories of press protected from regulation under the FEC’s Press Exemption. Listen to the debate here, at Minutes 8:53 – 22:30.
Bloomberg BNA: Foreign Solicitation Curbs Backed by FEC; Details Disputed
By Kenneth P. Doyle
In addition to approving the advisory opinion on foreign solicitations, the FEC also agreed to form a new staff working group to come up with ideas to combat deception by political action committees widely known as scam PACs…
In a rare move, the FEC unanimously advanced a proposed rulemaking to update outmoded regulations and codify policies regarding new technologies, including internet campaign contribution systems…
In a related move, the FEC also unanimously advanced a rulemaking notice asking for additional comments on whether new rules are needed regarding political communications on the internet. The notice said existing FEC disclaimer rules requiring statements about who is paying for a communication and authorization by a candidate were written for print and broadcast communications and do not necessarily fit digital communications.
Washington Examiner: Another day, another Dem attack on free speech
By Washington Examiner Staff
Democratic commissioners on the Federal Election Commission demonstrated again last week how fortunate America is that the panel on which they serve is perpetually gridlocked.
FEC Commissioner Ellen Weintraub submitted a last-minute proposal at their meeting Thursday that would limit political speech by companies that have foreign ownership as small as 5 percent.
For the record, this measure would have no effect on the Washington Examiner. But it would make the New York Times’ recent endorsement of Hillary Clinton illegal. It could also affect publicly traded companies in which foreigners choose to invest.
Such a stifling of political speech is un-American. And it reveals a xenophobia among FEC Democrats in their push to reduce freedom of speech in the name of campaign finance regulation.
The Media
Washington Examiner: Clinton-endorsing newspaper reportedly receiving death threats
By T. Becket Adams
An Arizona newspaper has reportedly received death threats this week for endorsing Hillary Clinton and breaking its 126-year-old tradition of backing only Republican presidential candidates…
The Arizona Republic is neither the first newspaper in the 2016 election to break its longstanding tradition of backing GOP presidential candidates, nor is it the only one to reportedly face consequences for endorsing Clinton.
The Cincinnati Enquirer announced its support for the Democratic nominee last Friday, breaking a GOP-only streak that lasted for more than a century…
Separately, the Dallas Morning News, which broke its own 75-year-old tradition of backing GOP presidential candidates, said it is has experienced a noticeable decline in subscriptions following its endorsement of Clinton.
Candidates and Campaigns
CNN: Trump finally hits the big-money jackpot
By Theodore Schleifer
Donald Trump, at long last, has won them over.
Amid the campaign’s final frenzy, there are encouraging signs that Trump’s slow-to-build money operation has matured to presidential caliber, but alarm persists that it may be too late to combat Hillary Clinton’s big-dollar machine, according to a dozen people with ties to Trump’s finance team.
The fundraising quarter that ended Friday has injected sorely needed cash into Trump’s White House hopes, with long-sought donations finally clearing and optimism abound that Trump himself will match his tightening poll numbers with a loosening of his own wallet.
Politico: Clinton campaign raises more than $154 million in September
By Rebecca Morin
Hillary Clinton’s campaign raised more than $154 million in September, marking its best fundraising month, according to a statement released Saturday.
Hillary for America raised about $84 million, while about $70 million was raised for the Democratic National Committee and state parties through the Hillary Victory Fund and the Hillary Action Fund, according to the statement…
“With Donald Trump promising to dump an additional $50 million of his own money into the campaign and right-wing billionaires pledging millions more, we must continue to step up in order to have the resources we need to mobilize millions of voters across the country,” Mook said.
New York Times: Democrats Rake In Money, Thanks to Suit by Republicans
By Nicholas Confessore and Rachel Shorey
Democrats denounced it as an assault on democracy and a sop to billionaires when the Supreme Court issued a ruling two years ago that loosened limits on campaign giving.
But Hillary Clinton and Democratic Party leaders are now exploiting the decision, funneling tens of millions of dollars from their wealthiest donors into a handful of presidential swing states…
The money followed a legal but circuitous route turbocharged by the 2014 ruling in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which struck down Watergate-era limits on the combined amount one person could donate to all federal candidates and parties in an election cycle.
The States
Huffington Post: California Makes Major Campaign Finance Reform Move
By Paul Blumenthal
California Gov. Jerry Brown (D) signed legislation on Thursday freeing the state and local governments to provide for the public funding of elections…
The legislation passed the California legislature with more than two-thirds support. It overturned a 1988 ballot initiative that banned the state from spending public funds on elections. The state and other local governments, however, are still bound by judicial rulings limiting such publicly financed election systems to voluntary programs.
Seattle Times: The Times recommends: Campaign finance is flawed; vote no on I-1464
By Editorial Board
Washington’s campaign-finance laws could use a refresh. Initiative 1464, which includes a way to publicly finance elections through “democracy vouchers,” is not the way do it. Voters should say no to I-1464.
Reject this half-baked campaign-finance proposal, which seizes public dollars that should go toward higher priorities like education. The few positives of this measure – including more transparency for campaign donations, new lobbying limits and a stronger and better financed Public Disclosure Commission – do not outweigh the problems…
Especially problematic is how this initiative would be funded. The proposal would close a sales-tax exemption for visitors to the state.
Argus Leader: Republican leaders come out against IM 22
By Dana Ferguson
The campaign against a ballot measure that would overhaul the state’s campaign finance system received four powerful endorsements Friday.
The state’s Republican Congressional delegates and governor voiced their support for the campaign to trounce Initiated Measure 22, saying a component that would provide state-subsidized democracy credits would pull from other state programs…
The endorsements come a week after the campaigns for and against the measure refused to release their campaign finance statements to Argus Leader Media ahead of an October 28 deadline. And voters will have to wait to see those reports as the measure’s backers said they wouldn’t share their information unless the Defeat 22 released theirs first.
Washington Times: Commissioner: Anonymous political blogs can’t be regulated
By Associated Press
Montana’s elections regulator says blogs that provide political commentary penned by anonymous authors are not subject to campaign finance reporting and disclosure laws.
Independent Public Service Commission candidate Caron Cooper had filed a complaint against the Montana Cowgirl blog with Commissioner of Political Practices Jonathan Motl…
Cooper accused the author of the blog of electioneering and producing election materials anonymously in violation of state law.
Motl dismissed the complaint Thursday. He says blogs are not considered electioneering communications.
