In the News
Detroit News: Freedom vs. transparency in campaign finance reform
By Eric Wang
If you spend more than $500 to speak out about Michigan government policies, Secretary of State Ruth Johnson wants to subject you to registration and reporting requirements that are comparable to those imposed on sex offenders. That’s an odd way to encourage civic participation.
Under Secretary Johnson’s recently proposed regulations, beginning 30 days before a primary or 60 days before a general election, anyone whose speech is deemed to be “endorsing or condemning [a] candidate’s position or stance on issues” is subject to an extensive regulatory scheme. Worse, it isn’t even clear what it means to “endorse or condemn” a “position or stance.”
By this vague, overly restrictive standard, even this article criticizing Johnson’s proposed rule would constitute regulated speech if it were published during that timeframe when she is running for re-election or election to another office. While there is a special exemption under the law for newspaper editorials and commentary, if this piece were published as a paid insert or flier, the sponsor would have to file burdensome reports for the expenditure. It is obvious how such a rule can is self-serving for those in power.
Independent Groups
National Review: Don’t Tax Political Speech
By Douglas B. Levene
The very idea of taxing a nonprofit may seem strange. Since 501(c)(4) groups typically spend every penny they take in and don’t make any profits or distribute any earnings to shareholders, how can they have any liability for income taxes? The answer is that under IRS rules, any organization’s expenses are deductible only if it is engaged in profit-making activities. This rule is not completely illogical. It’s intended to prevent people from deducting expenses for their hobbies: Otherwise, you could declare your unprofitable hobby to be a business and write off everything you spent on it.
For example, consider what would happen if a bunch of fishermen decide to form an organization to promote fishing, buying boats and tackle and running fishing trips. Remember, if they were acting individually, none of them would be able to deduct their fishing expenses. If they form a club, all their contributions count as income to the club, and none of the expenses of the club are deductible — from either the donors’ individual taxes or those of the corporation — because the club is not engaged in a profit-making activity. This makes sense, because we do not want to permit individuals to create deductions for their hobbies by engaging in them collectively rather than individually.
Wall Street Journal: Campaign-Finance Reformers Criticize SEC Move
By Thomas Catan
In contrast, business groups cheered the news and accused proponents of trying to infringe on their free-speech rights.
“We are encouraged by the SEC’s decision not to include this partisan and politically motivated proposal in their rulemaking agenda,” a spokesman for the U.S. Chamber of Commerce said. “Campaign finance reform is not, has never been, and should never be a function of the SEC.”
SCOTUS/Judiciary
Ballot Access News: Ohio Files Brief in U.S. Supreme Court, Defending State Law that Makes it Illegal to Make a False Statement in a Campaign
By Richard Winger
The state argues that the Susan B. Anthony List (which had been sued by a congressional candidate for allegedly saying the candidate favored using taxpayer money to pay for abortions) was never threatened with prosecution, and therefore this is not a proper lawsuit for determining whether the Ohio law violates the First Amendment.
New Yorker: The Court’s Contempt for Congress
By Jeff Shesol
In Scalia’s case, this is personal. It goes back to his time as an assistant attorney general in the Ford Administration and its battles over executive privilege and secrecy. “It was such a wounded and enfeebled Presidency, and Congress was just eating us alive…,” Scalia recalled in a recent interview by Jennifer Senior of New York. “It was a time when people were talking about ‘the imperial Presidency.’ I knew very well that the 900-pound gorilla in Washington is not the Presidency. It’s Congress. If Congress can get its act together, it can roll over the president. That’s what the framers thought.” And that, he said, “will be the source of tyranny.”
State and Local
Colorado –– Longmont Times-Call: Longmont clerk reverses campaign finance ruling
By Scott Rochat
Citizens for a Safe and Healthy Longmont sent the mailer in October, urging support for City Council candidates who had supported a 2012 ban on fracking and defeat for those who didn’t. Skitt initially fined the group $100 last week for failing to include a statement that the ad was “not authorized by any candidate.”
But after further review, Skitt said, she realized the ad fell through the cracks. Under Longmont law, the sentence is only required if the flier is an “independent expenditure.” That means it uses “explicit phrases” to support or oppose a candidate, without consulting with any of the candidates first.
New York –– Newsday: Passage of campaign finance reform in doubt
By Yancey Roy
ALBANY — Nassau District Attorney Kathleen Rice, a co-chair of a state anti-corruption commission, said investigations would continue into 2014 even as lawmakers and analysts cast doubt Tuesday on the panel’s recommendation that New York move to publicly funded political campaigns.
Rice said the Commission to Investigate Public Corruption’s probes into legislative grants and other issues have just begun to “scratch the surface.”
