In the News
Albuquerque Journal: Bill threatens charities with harmful regulation
By Bradley A. Smith
New Mexico law already has strong disclosure rules. Contributions to political candidates and parties are publicly disclosed. Additionally, “political committees” – anyone who spends over $500 “primarily for a political purpose” – already must file extensive paperwork that is placed on the internet by the state for anyone to see. Such groups must file a complicated series of reports, documenting every dollar spent and every contribution received. They must further list the names and home addresses of every contributor who gives over $500…
Unfortunately, Sen. Majority Leader Peter Wirth, D-Santa Fe, and others in New Mexico have long been long pushing for even more disclosure. This disclosure would not be from candidates, parties, and political committees, but from a much broader array of civic organizations. Enter SB 96, a bill ushered through the Senate and currently before the House, that extends New Mexico’s disclosure rules to anyone who mentions a candidate in any ad near an election. This bill “fixes” campaign finance laws in the same way a law applying gun control regulations to Nerf weapons would “fix” gun laws.
Free Speech
More Soft Money Hard Law: Internet Politics-Is the Problem the Politics or the Internet?
By Bob Bauer
What is also unclear is why these means are closely associated with a specified political end. For example, what is it about a “negative campaign ad” that is markedly more useful to the right-wing sponsor? There are times when the anger can be turned in the opposite direction, as Republican Members of Congress recently found in their town hall meetings; and this anger is finding expression through social media, on TV, and surely in the election to come, in negative campaign advertising. Those same angry progressive voices will be amplified only if the required funding is available. “Loopholes”-as some understand Super PACs or (c)(4) issue advocacy to be-will flourish on the left and right alike.
An analysis linking different modes of political expression or participation to particular political outcomes can be a trap for progressives. It encourages the development of unrealistic, unsustainable reform objectives, like the one pursued through McCain Feingold to curb “negative speech.”
The Courts
New York Law Journal: Third Suit Challenges Nonprofit Donor Disclosure Requirement
By Joel Stashenko
A state law requiring that not-for-profit groups begin disclosing the identities of larger donors to the state Commission on Public Ethics is being challenged in a new federal suit.
The Lawyers Alliance for New York and the Nonprofit Coordinating Committee of New York filed the the complaint Monday in the Southern District.
Lawyers Alliance for New York v. Schneiderman, 1:17-cv-01655, contends that the donor reporting requirement approved in 2016 violates both the First and Fourth amendments to the U.S. Constitution. The law requires that the identities of those making monetary contributions or in-kind donations to 501(c)(3) charitable groups worth $5,000 or more in a one-year period be disclosed.
The lawsuit argues that the charitable groups are not lobbyists in the sense of trying to advocate in Albany for legislation from which they would profit; and also that a disclosure requirement could deter donors seeking anonymity.
Lafayette Independent: Trump could show hand on Louisiana fundraising case
By Jeremy Alford
President Donald Trump’s administration could potentially offer a filing in an appeal the Louisiana Republican Party is pushing before the U.S. Supreme Court.
The case challenges the federal ban on unlimited donations to political parties.
Trump’s Justice Department has until March 13 to file its response to a ruling last year from a three-judge D.C. District Court that upheld the limits enforced by the Federal Election Commission.
That response could be an indication of whether the Trump administration wants to challenge or protect the campaign finance law.
It could also place the Louisiana GOP at the epicenter of what could become another national debate over political donations.
FEC
The Hill: GOP commissioner: Trump poised to revamp election agency
By Rudy Takala
President Trump will probably replace a majority of commissioners on the Federal Election Commission (FEC) this year, Republican Commissioner Lee Goodman told The Hill. The move could reset the agency’s agenda for the first time in nearly a decade.
“I know that I am looking to depart the agency sometime this year,” said Goodman, who has served on the commission since 2013. “I would expect a new cast of at least four commissioners, probably this year.”…
“I think we all support a very free internet. I think that’s going to be a very significant change in the regulatory state under this president,” Goodman said, adding that Gorsuch could discourage legal challenges to the FEC’s decisions.
“I don’t think that under … a Justice Gorsuch, that you will see a retrenchment of First Amendment rights in the area of political speech and campaign finance,” Goodman said. “I am expecting that if … Gorsuch is confirmed, he will defend First Amendment freedoms robustly in the political sphere.”
BillMoyers.com: An Exit Interview With FEC Commissioner Ann Ravel
By John Light
I have two months left on my term. The other commissioners, all five of them, are already holdovers. The president can replace everybody. And one person on the commission has no ability to accomplish anything. In fact, three of us have no ability to accomplish anything, nor have we been able to. Because it requires four votes to do anything. It’s likely that the president will make replacement appointments because it’s rumored that some of the Republican commissioners would like to go to the administration.
But 3-2 or 3-3 – it’s the same. It means that nothing will happen. And that’s what they [the Republican commissioners] want to achieve. What we want to achieve is to affirmatively write regulations on the impact of foreign money in our campaigns. We want to do enforcement of those who are violating our laws. But it requires four votes. I am very gratified that there are people emailing me saying I have to stay for the good of the country. But actually, for the good of the country, I think I can do better on the outside.
San Jose Mercury News: Opinion: Ann Ravel is right about the need to control money in politics
By Laura Friedenbach and David Donnelly
Before stepping down from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) this week, Ann Ravel warned that the dismantling of the agency she is departing from could be “a test run for the people who do not believe in regulatory agencies or do not believe in government at all.”
In an interview on Every Voice’s podcast, Ravel said ideologues opposed to the FEC’s mission of enforcing campaign finance laws and ensuring transparency and accountability in our elections had “accomplished decimation of this agency so well, and it was so purposeful, that this is going to be the first of many.”
For a president that promised to “drain the swamp” of wealthy special interests, Ravel’s departure sets up a test: Will President Donald Trump show he’s committed to keeping wealthy special interests in check or will it prove to be an election-year ploy without substance?
Independent Groups
Daily Beast: How Trump Screwed His Own Super PACs
By Lachlan Markay
Some pro-Donald Trump political groups say the president’s early declaration of his re-election candidacy is forcing them to be transparent about their activities-and weighing them down with paperwork and compliance costs.
A lawyer for two pro-Trump groups, Great America PAC and the Committee to Defend the President, told The Daily Beast that Trump’s early official entry into the 2020 race has forced the two groups to reassess and redouble their disclosures to the Federal Election Commission.
“President Trump is now a clearly identified federal candidate, and spending any funds to make public communications that could be deemed as being in support of him requires filing” a notice of an independent expenditure with the FEC, said Dan Backer, a Republican attorney who represents both groups.
Other campaign finance experts say the groups would likely have to report some of that activity anyway, but Backer’s comments show how President Trump’s immediate declaration of his re-election candidacy is shaking up past campaign finance practices-and could even be inadvertently adding a measure of transparency to the process.
The States
U.S. News & World Report: Ethics Commission Proposal Advances in New Mexico
By Morgan Lee, Associated Press
A proposed constitutional amendment to create an independent ethics commission in New Mexico picked up endorsements from top legislative leaders on Monday as it moves toward the House floor for a vote.
Democratic House Speaker Brian Egolf promised to expedite a House vote to ensure time for Senate consideration before the Legislature adjourns March 18, as the House Judiciary Committee unanimously endorsed the plan. Approval by a majority of all lawmakers would put the measure on the statewide ballot in 2018…
Proponents of an ethics commission say trust has deteriorated in the current oversight of campaign and ethics regulations by partisan elected officials at the Attorney General’s Office and the Secretary of State’s Office, while lawmakers vet initial ethics complaints against colleagues.
The current reform proposals from Rep. Jim Dines, R-Albuquerque, would create a seven-member commission appointed by legislative leaders and the governor with the power to investigate public complaints, subpoena records and apply civil sanctions. Criminal cases still would be handled by the attorney general or district attorneys.
South Dakota Public Broadcasting: House Restores Pre-IM 22 Campaign Finance Limits
By Lee Strubinger
Voter-approved IM 22 reduced the amount of cash people can put into South Dakota elections. Earlier this session, lawmakers repealed it. Now the South Dakota House of Representatives has amended a bill to revert to the old campaign finance caps.
State Representative Mary Duvall lives in Pierre.
“So it kind of pushes the reset button,” Duvall says. “It takes out the reference to the fact that PACs could make unlimited contributions and it just restores the language to what it was before IM 22 passed.”
Supporters want to give a new legislative task force a clean slate, so members can determine proper political donation limits.
Senate Bill 54 first sought to clean up campaign finance language. Lawmakers amended more than 10 times. Critics say the bill doesn’t maintain enough integrity for them to support it.
The House passed the bill 55 to 12. The State Senate has to okay the amendments or it goes to a conference committee.
Gotham Gazette: Business Contributions and Campaign Finance in New York: Deep Historical Roots
By Bruce W. Dearstyne
One hundred and eleven years after New York’s first campaign finance regulation, the state is once again searching for a solution to the issue. Good government groups and the Joint Commission on Public Ethics have set forth proposals, including closing the LLC loophole and increasing disclosure requirements. Governor Cuomo mostly seems to have given up. He has remarked that it is now up to the people to get the loophole closed.
As it turns out, the people may have a chance to do that this fall, when New Yorkers vote on whether to hold a state constitutional convention. A convention could alter the way we conduct and finance campaigns, including even proposing public funding of political campaigns…
This year, New Yorkers have an opportunity to try again to get at the issue of money in politics. If the state’s three branches of government — governor, the Legislature, and the courts — can’t resolve the issue, then the voters may decide that is one strong reason to vote for a constitutional convention in November.
Urban Milwaukee: How Legislature Rigged the Game
By Steven Walters
Total spending on elections for Assembly and Senate seats was a record $28.1 million last year – $19.1 million by candidates and their party committees and $9 million by outside groups, WDC reported. That $28.1 million was 66 percent more than what was spent in 2014 elections.
And, for the first time, a regular November election for a seat in the Legislature cost more than $5.1 million. That’s 100 times the $50,900 salary of a legislator.
WDC Executive Director Matt Rothschild said the biggest reason for the 66 percent jump in spending was the doubling of maximum allowable donations for all state candidate..
What does record spending on legislative elections mean for 2018, when voters will elect a governor, attorney general and legislators for the 2019-20 session?
Spending “will be through the roof,” Rothschild predicted. “It’s a rigged game, becoming more rigged.”
Portsmouth Seacoast Online: Council OKs amendment for campaign finance transparency
By Jeff McMenemy
After a lengthy and sometimes tense debate, the City Council voted 7-2 to have the city attorney draft an amendment to a city ordinance that would force groups that spend money to endorse a slate of candidates to disclose where that money came from.
Mayor Jack Blalock and City Councilor Rebecca Perkins cast the lone votes against the proposed ordinance change…
Blalock called the idea “well intended” but worried it would have “unintended consequences.”…
Perkins argued against the initiative saying “it’s important to realize there are costs for transparency, there are costs for people preparing these disclosures.” “I don’t want anyone to feel discouraged from participating in this process,” she said.
Perkins, who is serving her first term on the council, said she believes it’s a good part of city politics for people to “form groups that advocate for candidates.”
“I don’t like the allusion to there being something nefarious about that,” she said. “That’s the process and I think it’s great.”
