In the News
Reason: The Misguided Case Against ‘Dark Money’ In Politics
By A. Barton HinkleOn the other hand, it is easy to see how disclosing so-called dark-money donors could impair democracy. First, as former FEC Chairman Bradley Smith testified to Congress earlier this year, “studies have confirmed that the costs of mandated disclosure disproportionately harm grass-roots organizations and campaigns run by volunteers. Complying with disclosure laws often requires expensive legal counsel, an accountant, and other record-keeping staff.” What’s more, citizen activists might refrain from activism out of fear that they might unintentionally break some obscure reporting rule.The threat to citizen activism goes even further than that. Many people contribute to groups such as Planned Parenthood because they support its general mission, not because they expect to participate in elections by doing so. In 2012, Planned Parenthood spent roughly $7 million on so-called dark-money expenditures—a tiny fraction of its billion-dollar budget. Ask yourself whether more of the group’s supporters or fewer of them would write checks knowing their names, addresses and occupations would be put online for all the world to see. (Indeed, Alabama tried to use just such disclosure requirements to keep the NAACP from operating there in the 1950s—and the Supreme Court ruled unanimously that it had no right to. “Compelled disclosure of affiliation,” the court wrote, “may constitute as effective a restraint on the freedom of association” as other kinds of governmental interference.)Much of the hostility to dark money comes from the press, which has an ideological ax to grind against money and an institutional bias against secrecy of any sort. But the media had better be careful what they wish for. There is zero functional difference between a dark-money issue ad and, say, an NPR or Pro Publica story critical of a Republican candidate’s position on climate change. When dark money gets spent, it gets spent to disseminate opinions—precisely what the First Amendment was written to protect.
SCOTUS/Judiciary
AP: High court won’t hear challenge to Vermont campaign law
The justices on Monday declined to hear an appeal from the Vermont Right to Life Committee, an anti-abortion group. The group argued that Vermont’s campaign finance registration, reporting and disclosure requirements for PACs were too broad and unconstitutional.
Wisconsin
Wisconsin Reporter: Doe possessed: ‘They have information about every aspect of our lives’
By MD KittleMADISON, Wis. – Almost five months after the Government Accountability Boardquietly ended its role in a politically charged investigation into dozens of Wisconsin conservative groups, the agency has yet to return property seized from people caught up in the probe.“I would think that because it’s not an ongoing investigation, then it seems to me they should get their stuff back,” said constitutional law expert Rick Esenberg.Investigators seized paper files, computers and other electronic devices, including the electronic equipment of targets’ family members, among other property, in raids in October 2013.
Tax Financing
Hartford Courant: State Rests In Newton Campaign Finance Fraud Case
By David OwensThe six-person Hartford Superior Court jury also heard from Charles Urso, a retired FBI agent who now works as an investigator for the State Elections Enforcement Commission and made the initial inquiry into allegations that Newton fraudulently obtained $80,550 in state funding for his failed state senate campaign in 2012.The state contends that Newton, a 58-year-old Democrat, had five campaign workers sign contribution forms, although they did not actually give any money to the campaign. The campaign needed the money so that it would reach the $15,000 threshold necessary to obtain the matching funds from the state’s public campaign financing program.By doing so, the state charges, Newton broke the law and fraudulently obtained the state matching funds.Newton, who served nearly five years in federal prison in a separate corruption case, is on trial on two counts of first-degree larceny, five counts of illegal practices in campaign financing and one count of witness tampering.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
Politico: Kamala Harris to run for Boxer seat
By Alex Isenstadt and Andrew RestucciaSAN FRANCISCO — California Attorney General Kamala Harris will launch her campaign for retiring Democratic Sen. Barbara Boxer’s seat Tuesday morning, a source close to Harris told POLITICO.Her announcement will come one day after Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsom, an ambitious figure seen as her chief rival, announced that he would not be running for Senate, positioning himself instead to run for governor in 2018. “I know that my head and my heart, my young family’s future, and our unfinished work all remain firmly in the State of California — not Washington D.C,” he said.Former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villiaraogosa, meanwhile, has said he is “seriously considering” entering the campaign. Tom Steyer, a hedge fund billionaire and environmentalist, is also seen as interested.
State and Local
Texas –– Houston Chronicle: In campaign finance case, city to argue against its own rules
By Theodore SchlepperThe strategy, hatched in closed chambers by Feldman after more than an hour of heated debate in the 165th District Court, amounts to the city capitalizing on its own loss just days before.“In the first instance, we have some obligation to defend the constitutionality of (city) ordinances,” Feldman said in an interview following Monday’s hearing. “But we have a ruling from a federal district court judge that the blackout period is unconstitutional. I believe he is correct.”Houston’s blackout period, passed in 1992, prohibits city candidates from raising money for 10 months before the February of an election year. The blackout, meant to limit corruption, effectively froze campaigning until Feb. 1, when a frenzy of renewed fund-raising ensued.
Utah –– Utah Political Capitol: Flagged Bill: HB 60 – Campaign Finance Amendments – Rep. Brian King
By Ryan CurtisRepresentative Brian King (Democrat – Salt Lake City) is attempting to limit campaign contributions with HB 60 – Campaign Finance Amendments.This is not King’s first attempt to reign in campaign contributions. King has run similar legislation for the past four years, however, each time King comes a little bit closer. The 2010 bill died in committee while the 2014 bill failed on a very close 35-38 vote in the House.If passed, HB 60 would limit contributions from political action committees, corporations, and other individuals. A maximum of $5,000 could be donated to a legislative, judicial, or school board candidate. Donations to a current state office-holder would be limited to $10,000. Donations to political parties, political action committees, and labor organizations would be capped at $40,000. Under the bill, violating these limits would be a class B misdemeanor.
