CCP
New CCP Issue Brief: “Dark Money” Drops to 2.9% of Campaign Spending in 2016
Among other things, CCP’s Brief found:
- “Dark money” declined in both absolute and relative terms from the last presidential election cycle, down to $184 million from $309 million.
- “Dark money” accounted for only 2.9% of all campaign expenditures in 2015-2016.
- Nonprofits have never accounted for more than 5% of all election campaign spending in any election cycle.
“For years, opponents of free speech have made it seem like campaign spending by nonprofits is dominating our politics. It’s not,” said CCP President David Keating. “Nonprofits play a small but important role in campaigns. If only politicians and PACs could speak about candidates, Americans would be worse off.”
By Luke Wachob
Supporters of Public Financing Still Cannot Make a Convincing Case
By Joe Albanese
Rauh waves off the objection to paying politicians to run for office, saying it “fails to acknowledge that our current system of selling influence to wealthy donors who buy influence by financing our elections undermines values that are fundamental to our democracy…” There is little to no evidence of this problem actually existing – or of taxpayer-funded campaigns being the solution. CCP’s research has found that taxpayer-financing programs fail to reduce the influence of lobbyists and special interests in states in which these schemes are implemented, including neighboring Maine. A 2003 survey of nearly 40 academic studies also concluded that campaign contributions should not be viewed as a way of buying policy outcomes. Even studies that (incorrectly) claim to prove the relationship between contributions and policy lament the lack of supporting evidence in scholarly research. If anything, there are ample examples to demonstrate that tax-financing programs exacerbate and offer new avenues for public corruption.
Tax-Financed Campaigns
HuffPost: Elizabeth Warren Has A Real Plan To Drain The Swamp In Washington
By Daniel Marans
ike many other Democrats, Warren called for overturning the Supreme Court’s Citizens United decision that has allowed unlimited corporate cash to flow into the electoral system, as well as amending the Constitution to prevent such a decision from ever being made again.
Warren went further though, implying she sees state- and city-level experiments with public campaign financing as a critical part of the answer to cleaning up the corruption invited by massive private donations.
Free Speech
Wall Street Journal: The ACLU Is Right Where It Has Always Been
By David Cole
But the authors fail to mention other speech work that doesn’t suit their narrative, like our briefs in support of the Washington Redskins’ right to a trademark despite the offensive name, the Westboro Baptist Church’s right not to be held liable for homophobic slurs or the Sons of Confederate Veterans’ right not to have a specialty license plate rejected because of its racist views. The ACLU regularly represents Christians, evangelicals and members of other denominations in defense of religious freedom.
The authors fault us for supporting the Affordable Care Act, but we proudly do so because it contains important antidiscrimination provisions that protect women, LGBT individuals and persons with disabilities.
Washington Post: The case for taking down Confederate monuments
By Ilya Somin
The issue comes down to this simple proposition: the government should not honor people whose principal claim to fame is that they fought a bloody war in defense of the evil institution of slavery. Ultimately, the case for removing Confederate monuments is the same as the case for removing the Confederate flag from public spaces of honor, and the case for renaming sites such as the Jefferson Davis Highway…
As Bailey and Jacoby note, it would be wrong to disturb Confederate cemeteries and other similar facilities whose purpose is to commemorate and lament the dead, rather than their deeds and the cause they fought for. Likewise, the government should not suppress the use of Confederate symbols and monuments by private organizations, including those that wrongheadedly seek to defend the Confederacy and its legacy. They are entitled to freedom of speech, no less than advocates of other causes. The state should not endorse such advocacy, but it also should not persecute it.
Political Parties
More Soft Money Hard Law: The Political Parties and Their Problems
By Bob Bauer
The Supreme Court has refused to review a Ninth Circuit ruling denying political parties the right to exclude nonmembers from participation in their primaries. Hawaii law requires an open primary, and under the Ninth Circuit decision, parties would bear the burden of showing that this requirement severely burdens their rights of association. In other words when parties must open their candidate selection processes to non-members, the infringement of that associational right is not, apparently, self-evident.
The Ninth Circuit decided this incorrectly. It misconstrues the controlling Supreme Court authority, and it disregards its own entirely inconsistent decision in Washington State Democratic Party v. Reed. It is revealing that the Court’s panel’s denial of that inconsistency is tucked into a disingenuous footnote.
Dangers of Disclosure
NJ.com: Democrats launch ads against Frelinghuysen after he outed activist to her employer
By Jonathan D. Salant
The Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee will begin a digital ad campaign Tuesday against Rep. Rodney Frelinghuysen, who identified a member of an opposition group to her employer…
“Representative Frelinghuysen abused the power of his office when he targeted his constituent for exercising her First Amendment rights,” DCCC spokesman Evan Lukaske said. “His unethical actions represent the very worst kind of politics and show exactly why he needs to be replaced next November.”
Independent Groups
PennLive: Did Toomey get scammed by PAC targeted in FBI raid?
By Colin Deppen
“I never interacted with them. … They pick popular races to fundraise off of, but none of the money ever gets to the candidates. I have no idea how much they raised (on Toomey’s behalf).”
The Federal Election Commission isn’t sure either. In an email to PennLive, the regulatory agency said based on what was reported by Conservative StrikeForce, there were no earmarks from individual contributors to specific candidates.
But the group’s since-deleted donation tab on its website could easily give a supporter that impression.
Trump Administration
Forbes: The Special Counsel Isn’t Enough — Why It’s Vital That Congress Vigorously Continue Russia Probes
By Charles Tiefer
The Senate Watergate Committee is most famous for preparing the way for President Nixon’s impeachment. It is sometimes forgotten that the Watergate Committee studied the need, and built the case, for the campaign finance law that was subsequently passed. There may well be important legislation that should be considered coming out of the 2016 election scandal. Consideration of such legislation should precede, not follow, the next national election in 2018. Congress must learn the lessons in time to act on them in months to come. That is neither Mueller’s job nor his timetable.
The States
Casper Star-Tribune: Campaign finance reform advocates working to get initiative on ballot
By Laura Hancock
A group of Wyomingites is pushing for campaign finance reform in the state and nationally through a ballot initiative – including a former legislative candidate who believes a liberal dark money group that supported him actually interfered in his race.
Wyoming Promise members want an amendment to the U.S. Constitution that would repeal a number of U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have loosened limits on how much people and groups spend in races.
WKSU: Ohio’s Tea Party and Liberals Join Forces To Challenge and Internet Free Speech State Law
By Phil De Oliveira
They’re taking issue with a clause in H.B. 151 that prohibits anyone from intentionally abusing, threatening or harassing someone else on the Internet.
Tea Party spokesman Tom Zawistowski says the clause is too broad and too vague. He says politicians could easily claim they’re being harassed when groups like the Tea Party criticize them.
“If you’re in public office, you need to be accountable for your actions,” Zawistowski says. “We, as citizens, hold you accountable and we must be able to say what we think about your performance.”
Seattle Times: Political parties should set example with campaign laws, not flout them
By Editorial Board
The accusations are significant, especially for an established political organization. Reports on a total of $65,442 in expenses and $74,261 in contributions were filed late, according to court documents. The attorney general’s office says the Democratic Committee failed to file any financial reports on time during last year’s election season. That means Democratic candidates in King County may have had an unfair advantage in some races, because clear information about donations and spending may sway votes.
