In the News

Lincoln Journal Star: Nebraska excels at allowing free political speech

By Joe Albanese

Nebraska ranked as one of the top states in the country, earning an A-plus. This places it alongside 10 other states that earned an A or higher.

One crucial trait these states have in common is that they don’t limit the freedom of individuals to give to candidates, parties and political committees, as well as the ability of parties and political committees to give to candidates.

Nebraska ditched its limits in 2011 after then-Attorney General Jon Bruning concluded they were constitutionally dubious. Previously, the state had not limited the amount any one donor could provide to any one candidate, but did restrict the overall amount a candidate could receive from all committees, corporations, unions, associations and political parties.

Acting on Bruning’s advice, the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission ceased enforcing those limits. Now, Nebraska is one of several states with no restrictions on the freedom to support candidates and groups.

New York Times: Billionaire vs. Billionaire: A Tug of War Between 2 Rogue Donors

By Alexander Burns,  Jasmine C. Lee, and Rachel Shorey

Two rogue billionaires – one on the left, one on the right – have emerged as the biggest political spenders of the 2018 elections, defying their own parties and pouring millions of dollars into confrontational campaign tactics…

David Keating, a campaign finance expert who favors fewer restrictions on political spending, said the rise of donors like Mr. Uihlein and Mr. Steyer mirrored the country’s broader political polarization.

“There are probably more donors who are ideologically driven today than there were in the past,” said Mr. Keating, a former strategist for the Club for Growth.

But Mr. Keating cautioned that the prominence of activist donors could also fade over the course of the year, once primary season is over. Many wealthy donors, he said, prefer to save their spending for the more straightforward fall contests that pit one Republican against one Democrat.

Indeed, beyond Mr. Uihlein and Mr. Steyer, a longer list of individuals who have donated the most so far shows many major givers who appear more conventional in their practices.

NBC Chicago: Supreme Court Refuses to Hear Blagojevich Appeal

By Phil Rogers

Blagojevich, his family, and supporters had argued there was a larger issue at stake than the former governor’s freedom. Numerous politicians and others filed briefs with the court, asking that they take Blagojevich’s case to clear up what even opponents agree is arcane and at times, even conflicting campaign finance law. 

“Why is it so easy to put politicians in jail in the Midwest, and so difficult on the east coast,” asked Leonard Goodman, Blagojevich’s attorney. “If we’re going to require elected officials who aren’t independently wealthy to go out and raise funds, tell them what the line is so that they can follow the rules.” 

At issue, he argued, one standard (McCormick v. United States) which says a politician breaks the law if he makes an explicit promise to do something in exchange for a campaign contribution. But another ruling (Evans v. United States) presents a conflict in the eyes of many critics—that the lawmaker only needs to believe that something is expected…

“Although Blagojevich is an unsympathetic petitioner, the court should hear his case,” David Keating, President of the Institute for Free Speech wrote last week in the publication The Hill. “The Supreme Court finally has a chance to provide clarity and a uniform standard nationally by taking this case.” 

The Court declined to take that chance, rejecting Blagojevich’s appeal, without comment.

Billboard Insider: Cato Calls Billboard Law Unconstitutional

The Cato Institute and other conservative think tanks are supporting the legal attack on billboard law as unconstitutional infringement on free speech.

Cato, based in Washington, DC, filed an amicus brief on April 10 in a case called Thomas v. Schroer, which challenges Tennessee’s billboard controls.

“Tennessee’s statutory and regulatory framework for ‘billboards’ presents an irrational, unnecessary, and overly expansive restriction on the constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of speech and expression,” said Cato’s 21-page brief submitted to the US Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals…

The State of Tennessee defends its billboard law as a proper balance of regulation and respect for free speech. The US Department of Justice is supporting the state, along with the Outdoor Advertising Association of America (OAAA).

The plaintiff, William H. Thomas Jr, is represented by the Institute for Free Speech, based in Alexandria, VA.

Internet Speech Regulation

Microsoft Blog: Announcing the Defending Democracy Program

By Tom Burt

The Defending Democracy Program will work with all stakeholders in democratic countries globally to:

Protect campaigns from hacking through increased cyber resilience measures, enhanced account monitoring and incident response capabilities;

Increase political advertising transparency online by supporting relevant legislative proposals such as the Honest Ads Act and adopting additional self-regulatory measures across our platforms;

Explore technological solutions to preserve and protect electoral processes and engage with federal, state and local officials to identify and remediate cyber threats; and

Defend against disinformation campaigns in partnership with leading academic institutions and think tanks dedicated to countering state-sponsored computational propaganda and junk news…

Expect to hear more from us on what we’re doing, both on our own and in partnership with governments and our industry colleagues, to put our cybersecurity expertise to work for the defense of democracy.

Bloomberg: Most of Divisive Facebook Ads Were Paid for by ‘Suspicious’ Groups

By Bill Allison

More than half of the sponsors of ads on Facebook that featured divisive political messages ahead of the 2016 presidential election have little or no public paper trails, according to a study from researchers at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.

One-sixth of those ad buyers with little background information were linked to Russia, according to the study released Monday. Researchers examined 5 million ads encountered from Sept. 28 to Nov. 8, 2016, by about 9,500 volunteers, who were chosen to represent the demographics and partisan affiliations of U.S. voters…

Young Mie Kim, the study’s lead author, and her team found that a quarter of the Facebook ads that were examined mentioned candidates…

Though most of the ads didn’t mention candidates, many echoed themes raised by the them, the researchers found…

While sponsors of such ads aren’t required to disclose their spending online, a bipartisan measure proposed to address the gap, called the Honest Ads Act, would require Facebook and other online platforms to report the buyers of such ads to the Federal Election Commission…

The peer-reviewed study was jointly released by the Campaign Legal Center in Washington and Issue One, a group that advocates for changes in the nation’s election laws.

Supreme Court

Chicago Tribune: U.S. Supreme Court again rejects Rod Blagojevich appeal

By Jason Meisner

The U.S. Supreme Court has for the second time rejected an appeal by imprisoned former Gov. Rod Blagojevich of his convictions on corruption charges.

The justices did not comment Monday in letting stand the convictions and 14-year prison term that Blagojevich is serving. He’s scheduled to be released in 2024.

Blagojevich’s lawyers had wanted the high court to take up his case to make clear what constitutes illegal political fundraising. They argued that politicians are vulnerable to prosecution because the line between what’s allowed and what’s illegal is blurry.

The States

Montana Public Radio: In Montana Politics, Personal Wealth Goes A Long Way, To A Point

By Corin Cates-Carney

In a primary election, personal wealth helps get a campaign moving, but if a candidate is going to be successful in the June 5 primary and in the November general election, they need to fund their campaign with money outside of their own pocket, says Edwin Bender from the National Institute on Money In State Politics…

When a candidate visits the local county fair, kisses a baby, talks about sitting down with regular folks having a cup of coffee, that builds a relationship, or at least the perception of relationship. And Bender says can be more valuable than money.

Montana election history shows that the more of a candidate’s campaign war chest that comes from personal contributions the less likely they are to win.

“If you gave your campaign over half or your money your chances of winning were 16 percent. And those are figures mirrored across the country,” Bender says.

In Montana elections since the 1990s, candidates’ chances of winning decreased as the percentage of campaign funds they contributed themselves increased.