In the News
CT Viewpoints: Finally, taxpayers might be off the hook for funding election campaigns
By Alex Cordell
So, after almost $75 million in taxpayer dollars, what have voters received from their “clean elections” program? Not much.
An analysis by the Center for Competitive Politics found no change in the voting behavior of legislators who used tax dollars for their re-election campaigns. The program didn’t change their tendency to side with organized interests when bills came to the floor. Another study released in 2010 by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) looked at similar tax-financing programs in Arizona and Maine, which have existed since 2000. The GAO analyzed five goals set by each state after the creation of their tax-financing programs, but couldn’t find any evidence they had been achieved. The program also shamefully forces Connecticut residents to subsidize candidacies they may disagree with.
Advocates of the Citizens’ Election Program, and tax-financing schemes more broadly, ignore the reality that these programs have failed to solve the corruption problem in government…
In fact, in the years since Connecticut adopted its tax-financing system, several instances of corruption from “clean election” candidates have surfaced. Many have been investigated or even convicted for the same crimes that spurred calls for tax-financing in the first place.
Congress
ABC News: Facebook turns over thousands of Russia-linked ads to Congress
By Benjamin Siegel
Facebook turned over more than 3,000 Russia-linked ads to congressional investigators Monday.
The social media company was expected to provide the advertisements to the House and Senate Intelligence Committees and the Senate Judiciary Committee, which are all investigating Russian election interference. Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., the ranking member of the House Intelligence Committee confirmed his committee received the ads.
“These ads are significant to our investigation as they help demonstrate how Russia employed sophisticated measures to push disinformation and propaganda to millions of Americans online during the election, in order to sow discord and chaos, and divide us from one another,” said Schiff in a statement…
Schiff said that his committee will seek “to determine what groups and individuals were most heavily targeted and why.” He also promised a degree of transparency in the proceedings, saying that he hopes to release “a representative sampling” of the ads later in October to help “inoculate the public against future Russian interference in our elections.”
FEC
Washington Examiner: Fake Russian Facebook accounts spark major FEC debate
By Melissa Quinn
Facebook’s revelations last month that it sold more than $100,000 worth of ads to fake accounts tied to a Russian company could usher in a change in how the Federal Election Commission governs political advertising online…
But the questions of how and whether to regulate political advertisements online have been a source of deep divide within the FEC since well before the 2016 presidential election, and are likely to prompt more debate among the commission should it decide to issue new regulations for political spending online.
The FEC took its first step in exploring a change in the rules on disclaimers for online advertisements when it unanimously voted on Sept. 14 to reopen the period for public comment on a rulemaking notice related to online advertising.
Though the Republican and Democratic members of the commission voted together, there were disagreements over whether the rules are necessary and if the FEC is moving too fast, particularly as numerous congressional investigations and a federal probe into Russian meddling continues.
TechFreedom Tech Policy Podcast: #198: Social Media and Elections (w/ FEC Comm’r Lee Goodman)
Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election isn’t exactly breaking news. But recently, social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter are facing an intense backlash from prominent Senators after revelations that Russian actors bought hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of ads meant to stoke division among Americans on hot button issues like gun control, race relations, and even the recent NFL protests. Should the Federal Election Commission regulate social media ads the same way it does television, radio, and direct mail? What would that mean for the free speech rights of Americans and U.S residents? Many are calling for social media platforms to be treated like public utilities. How might that impact the Internet? Evan discusses with FEC Commissioner Lee Goodman.
Disclosure
Washington Post: Facebook can’t protect elections on its own
By Editorial Board
In the wake of Facebook’s announcement, the FEC will be taking comments on whether to revisit those disclaimer requirements and whether ads placed online for free – for example, on YouTube – should be regulated along with paid ads. Meanwhile in Congress, Sens. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) and Mark R. Warner (D-Va.) have proposed legislation to begin applying public-disclosure laws to political advertisements on the Internet as well as television and radio. The bill would also require that platforms take reasonable steps to avoid foreign-backed ads.
These proposals would not fully solve the problem of Russian meddling; Ms. Klobuchar and Mr. Warner’s proposal might not have mandated disclosure of the Russian ads that sought to rile social tensions without reference to political candidates or legislation. But that doesn’t mean that the efforts aren’t worthwhile – or that they don’t deserve cooperation from platforms such as Facebook. Republicans in Congress and the FEC should work alongside Democrats in both institutions to weigh how best to protect elections from foreign interference, while also preserving the Internet as a home for vibrant political discussion.
The Media
Wall Street Journal: Facebook Is Still In Denial About Its Biggest Problem
By Christopher Mims
Facebook Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg recently said his company will do more to combat illegal and abusive misuse of the Facebook platform. The primary mechanism for vetting political and other ads will be “an even higher standard of transparency,” he said, achieved by, among other things, making all ads on the site viewable by everyone…
By default, most media firms vet the ads they run and refuse ones that might be offensive or illegal, says Scott Galloway, entrepreneur, professor of marketing at NYU Stern School of Business and author of “The Four,” a book criticizing the outsize growth and influence of Amazon, Apple, Facebook and Google.
Mr. Zuckerberg acknowledged in a recent Facebook post that the majority of advertising purchased on Facebook will continue to be bought “without the advertiser ever speaking to anyone at Facebook.” …
“Facebook has embraced the healthy gross margins and influence of a media firm but is allergic to the responsibilities of a media firm,” Mr. Galloway says…
Of course, mobilizing a massive team of ad monitors could subject Facebook to exponentially more accusations of bias from all sides. For every blatant instance of abuse, there are hundreds of cases that fall into gray areas.
Wisconsin John Doe
MacIver News Service: Kevin Kennedy Caught On Tape: Former Speech Cop Shares John Doe Secrets
By M.D. Kittle
Today, MacIver News is releasing the audio of Kennedy’s curious defense of the disbanded agency at the center of one of Wisconsin’s darkest political chapters.
Kennedy at December’s national COGEL conference discussed a news story and accompanying court-sealed documents on the John Doe investigation, something that appears to be a violation of the probe’s strict secrecy order…
In the audio obtained by MacIver News Service, Kennedy waxes nostalgic for a simpler time, when law enforcement agents could storm into the private homes of citizens before sunrise and grab their possessions in pursuit of campaign finance law violations. He seems to long for the return of years-long spying operations pushed by partisan prosecutors and “ethics” attorneys, collecting mountains of personal information ultimately used as opposition research by their friends on the political left.
The States
Bay Area Mercury News: California bill takes aim at dark money in politics – will Jerry Brown sign it?
By Katy Murphy
The unions, corporations or billionaires behind the money would be listed, rather than the obscure committees with misleading, feel-good names that wrote the checks…
And the bill’s author, Assemblyman Kevin Mullin, D-San Mateo, managed to neutralize the labor opposition with changes relating to membership dues used in campaigns…
In an interview this week, Mullin said: “I feel pretty bullish the governor will sign it,” calling it “a reform whose time has come.”
Critics of the bill, including Republican Assemblyman Matthew Harper, R-Costa Mesa, who voted against it, complain that it stacks the deck for Democrats by making an exception for membership dues, helping the labor unions that fund Democrats’ campaigns.
If a member’s dues are used to pay for a campaign, the organization – not the individual dues-payer – would appear as the contributor as long as the total amount is below $500. Mullin and others argue the change eases the paperwork burden for membership organizations while making it easier for the public to follow the money.
CT Post: Connecticut’s public campaign financing spared – for now
By Neil Vigdor
Scores of Connecticut politicians reliant on public campaign financing got a stay of execution when Gov. Dannel P. Malloy vetoed the Republican budget last week…
The fluid nature of the negotiations, which are entering their fourth month, has cast uncertainty over the state’s decade-old clean-elections program.
The GOP’s budget fix called for raiding $35 million from the Citizens’ Election Fund for 2018…
GOP leaders are warning of a $10 million shortfall in the program for 2018, however. Until now, the program has relied on proceeds from the sale of abandoned property and unclaimed bottle deposits to cover its cost.
Klarides said Republicans are open to compromise on suspending the program, but will try to override Malloy’s veto when legislators reconvene Oct. 10. Despite being a recipient of public funds herself in past elections, Klarides said the state simply doesn’t have the money to pay for campaign swag such as bumper stickers and water bottles, not at the expense of funding the social safety net.
“We still maintain that our budget is the best thing for the state of Connecticut, and we are pushing for the override,” said Klarides, who is weighing a run for governor.
St. Louis Post-Dispatch: In Missouri, new campaign limits spur growth of PACs
By Kurt Erickson
A Post-Dispatch review shows a surge in the number of political action committees being formed that can bundle money far above the $2,600 individual contribution limits that were approved in a November referendum…
Election law attorney Chuck Hatfield, who served as chief of staff to former Gov. Jay Nixon, a Democrat, said the increase in PACs is linked to the new caps.
“Once you put limits in place, PACs explode,” Hatfield said. “The reason we see the increase is because of campaign finance limits.”…
The amendment approved by voters limits contributions to statewide, legislative and judicial offices to $2,600 per election. Contributions from a person or a committee to a political party would be capped at $25,000 per election.
In some cases, however, the caps already have been removed. In a May opinion, the MEC ruled that campaign committees formed by party leaders in the House and Senate are no longer limited to contributions totaling $25,000 annually.
In addition, the Missouri Chamber of Commerce recently filed a lawsuit challenging a provision of the new law that prohibits the pro-business group from contributing money to its own PAC.
Baltimore Sun: Loosened fundraising rules unleashing big cash for 2018 Maryland elections
By Erin Cox
The 2018 election cycle, which includes races for governor, attorney general, General Assembly and several county executives, is the first full cycle since a Supreme Court ruling lifted the cap on the total amount donors may contribute to candidates.
That 2014 ruling and a 2010 high court ruling on political action committees, analysts say, could unleash campaign spending up and down the ballot unlike anything Maryland has seen…
“We’re already detecting those little seismic shifts in our campaign finance system,” said Jennifer Bevan-Dangel, executive director of the political watchdog Common Cause Maryland. “We expect those shakes to turn into an earthquake.”
Donors may give no more then $6,000 to a single candidate during the four-year election cycle. But there’s no longer a limit on the total amount a donor may make to all candidates. And there’s no limit on how much donors may give to political action committees…
The Supreme Court ruled in 2014 that aggregate contribution caps were an unconstitutional infringement on free speech.
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: Councilwoman Harris’ attorney argues disclosure ordinances is illegal
By Chris Potter
Pittsburgh city Councilwoman Darlene Harris, and three other Pittsburgh office seekers, may still be arguing over the May primary by the time everyone else has cast their ballots in November.
Ms. Harris mounted an unsuccessful bid to challenge Mayor Bill Peduto’s re-election during the Democratic primary. During that run, she flouted a 2015 ordinance requiring candidates to file monthly disclosures of financial activity. The city’s Ethics Hearing Board was slated to decide whether to fine her for not complying, but on Wednesday Mr. Harris’ attorney argued that the ordinance itself was illegal.
Invoking a concept called “pre-emption,” Jim Burn told the six board members on hand that “campaign-finance [law] is reserved to the state.”…
A similar discussion took place earlier in the afternoon, when City Council District 4 candidate Mark Johnson also said state law barred the city’s penalties…On Monday, Gary McBurney and Cletus Cibrone Abate had hearings for failing to file reports. Both pled ignorance of the city rules.
Mr. Johnson, a lawyer with a background in government, said that if the board upheld his fine, he would appeal to the state’s Commonwealth Court. “People deserve to be protected from the city’s overreaching,” he said.
Maryland Diamondback: PG County officials hope to create small donor matching program for local elections
By Charlie Youngmann
Several officials from Maryland, Prince George’s County and other jurisdictions gathered Thursday at College Park’s City Hall to discuss public financing for county elections.
Prince George’s officials said they hope the county will adopt a campaign funding system similar to Montgomery County’s, which gives candidates the option to receive smaller individual donations, but then offers matching funds to eligible candidates, said Phil Andrews, a former Montgomery County councilman…
The proposed system would encourage candidates to collect a certain number of donations from residents within their respective jurisdiction, said Jennifer Dwyer, legislative and policy coordinator for Progressive Maryland, a nonprofit advocacy group focused on social, economic and racial justice. Each donation cannot exceed a certain amount set forth by the county.If these conditions are met, the candidate is then eligible to have their donation funds matched at a certain level by the county…
More than 30 people gathered in City Hall to hear about the proposed system, which Dwyer said could also allow more community leaders and activists to run for office without the expensive costs of a traditional campaign.
