Ed. note: The Daily Media Update will return Monday, June 21.
ICYMI
Proponents Say H.R. 1 and S. 1 Will End “Dark Money.” They Won’t.
By Alex Baiocco
If a bill fails to pass in every session of Congress for a decade because groups across the ideological spectrum oppose its constitutional infirmities, you might expect its sponsors to at least attempt to address those concerns. Yet the majority party’s marquee legislation this Congress, H.R. 1 in the House and S. 1 in the Senate, includes a version of the DISCLOSE Act, first introduced in 2010, that would restrict First Amendment rights more broadly than previous, failed versions.
As always, we are told increasing the federal government’s power to regulate and suppress speech about government is necessary because “dark money” has overtaken our elections. This claim has become almost unfalsifiable because the term’s definition mutates any time politicians find a new organization they want to silence. For that reason, any proposed “solution” to “dark money” is guaranteed to fail, or at least be deemed inadequate by its proponents.
Congress
Washington Post: Manchin outlines demands on voting legislation, creating an opening for potential Democratic compromise
By Mike DeBonis
Sen. Joe Manchin III, the lone Senate Democrat who is not sponsoring a sweeping voting rights and campaign finance bill, has outlined for the first time a list of policy demands on election legislation…
A three-page memo circulated by Manchin’s office this week indicates the West Virginia centrist’s willingness to support key provisions of the For the People Act…
According to two Democratic aides familiar with Manchin’s views, he has also signaled to colleagues that he opposes a public financing system for congressional elections that has emerged as one of the most controversial parts of the For the People Act…
Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) has announced that the Senate will take an initial vote on the legislation next week; Manchin said he did not know what changes Schumer and other Democrats would be willing to make to win his support…
[O]n Wednesday, he told reporters that he continued to think that Republican support was necessary: “You should not pass any type of a voter bill in the most divisive time of our life,” he said. “Unless you have some unity on this thing, because you just divide the country further.” …
Manchin also said Wednesday that he has not changed his views against eliminating the filibuster…
Schumer reiterated Wednesday that the Senate would vote on election legislation next week, but he has not detailed precisely what bill he will seek to advance. It is also unclear whether Schumer would delay a vote to reach an accord with Manchin.
Senate Democrats are expected to discuss next steps at a caucus meeting Thursday.
New York Times: Manchin presents his wish list for a voting rights and ethics bill.
By Jonathan Weisman
[Sen. Manchin] also suggested privately this week that he was working to alleviate pressure to end the legislative filibuster — a move that he has publicly promised to oppose — even though not even his version of a voting rights measure could overcome a Republican blockade…
On Wednesday, he [provided] an exhaustive list of provisions for a voting rights, ethics and campaign finance bill that he could support…
His campaign finance changes are not as far-reaching as those in the Democratic bill, but he would mandate disclosure of donors to “dark money” political committees and stronger rules to expose who is paying for social media advertising…
In a Zoom call reported by The Intercept, Mr. Manchin told the affluent financial supporters of the centrist group No Labels that he still hoped to preserve the filibuster, but that he needed some Republicans to help him prove that bipartisanship could still survive the toxic atmosphere in Congress.
Fox News: Republican senators to blast S1 as ‘Fund the Politicians Act’ on floor
By Houston Keene
A group of Republican senators led by Iowa Sen. Joni Ernst are taking to the Senate floor to blast the Democrats’ sweeping election reform bill, calling it the “Fund the Politicians Act.”
According to remarks obtained exclusively by Fox News, Ernst and her colleagues will hit the Senate floor on Wednesday afternoon to eviscerate the For the People Act — the Democrats’ controversial legislative priority that is seeing bipartisan opposition — as a bill that “prioritizes themselves.”
“This bill creates a federal campaign fund to finance the expenses of candidates for Congress,” Ernst’s remarks read…
Ernst, who serves as vice chair of the Senate GOP Conference, points out that the For the People Act “nationalizes elections” and “subsidizes politicians’ campaigns,” even those a voter may disagree with. She also warned that there is no “opting out” of the bill…
The senator is expected to be joined by several of her Republican colleagues on the floor, including Sens. Roy Blunt, R-Mo.; Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa; Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.V.; Rick Scott, R-Fla.; Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn.; Jim Inhofe, R-Ok.; Roger Marshall, R-Ks.; and Todd Young, R-Ind.
The Fulcrum: The 3 main reasons conservatives oppose HR 1
By Sara Swann
The campaign finance portion of [HR 1] includes provisions that would impose stronger and broader disclosure requirements on political advocacy nonprofits. Opponents say this would have a “chilling effect” on free speech because it would impinge on the privacy of major donors to political causes.
“The legislation will subject private citizens to intimidation and harassment for their private and political beliefs,” a coalition of more than 130 conservatives wrote in a February letter to Congress.
Conservatives aren’t the only ones with First Amendment concerns. The left-leaning American Civil Liberties Union also repeatedly criticized certain campaign finance provisions included in HR 1. The organization has sent letters to Congress in 2019 and this year ahead of key votes on the legislation.
In its most recent letter, the ACLU wrote: “We continue to have significant constitutional concerns with the bill, particularly the ways it would restrict nonprofit organizations’ advocacy about issues of national importance, such as immigration, racist police violence, voting rights, and reproductive freedom when that advocacy merely mentions candidates for federal office.”
FEC
New York Times: F.E.C. Dismisses Case Against Democrats Over Outreach to Ukraine
By Kenneth P. Vogel
The Federal Election Commission has dismissed a complaint by an ally of President Donald J. Trump accusing the Democratic Party and one of its former consultants of violating campaign finance laws by working with Ukraine to help Hillary Clinton’s 2016 campaign by damaging Mr. Trump’s.
An unusual bipartisan combination of members of the commission voted against pursuing a complaint filed in 2017 by Matthew G. Whitaker, a former federal prosecutor and staunch defender of Mr. Trump who was later appointed acting attorney general.
He filed the complaint after Mr. Trump and his White House began publicly calling for investigations of the matter in an effort to deflect attention from revelations that Mr. Trump’s son Donald Trump Jr. and other campaign advisers met with a Kremlin-connected Russian lawyer at Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign.
Mr. Whitaker claimed in his complaint that the Democratic National Committee and a consultant who had worked for it, Alexandra Chalupa, violated a prohibition on foreign donations by soliciting damaging information and statements from Ukrainian government officials about Paul Manafort, who was Mr. Trump’s campaign chairman at the time.
The commission — which is composed of three members selected by each party — voted 4 to 2 in April that there was not probable cause to believe that Ms. Chalupa and the Democratic National Committee broke the law, according to documents released Wednesday.
Washington Free Beacon: FEC Rules in Favor of DNC Operative in Ukraine Collusion Investigation
By Chuck Ross
“The ruling hurts the Democrat position on all the cases against Trump. It hurts [Weintraub’s] position to say that the DNC asking the Ukrainians for something is not a thing of value,” said James Trainor, a Republican FEC commissioner.
“It’s full-on Trump derangement syndrome at the Commission,” Trainor told the Washington Free Beacon.
Online Speech Platforms
The Verge: Facebook’s AI moderator will tell group admins when users are beefing in the comments
By James Vincent
Facebook is launching a suite of new tools to help group admins get a grip on their communities. Some simply offer a clearer overview of posts and members, while others are designed to help admins tackle conflict — including an AI-powered feature that Facebook says can identify “contentious or unhealthy conversations” taking place in the comments.
Candidates and Campaigns
New York Daily News: 25 corporations celebrating Pride Month have donated over $10 million to anti-LGBTQ politicians: report
By Muri Assunção
A new report published this week has found that 25 corporations that have declared support for the LGBTQ community during Pride Month have also contributed more than $10 million to anti-LGBTQ politicians over the last two years.
The States
Loveland Reporter-Herald: Group seeking recall of Don Overcash cries foul over new $130 limit on campaign contributions
By Max Levy
A group advocating for the recall of Loveland City Council member Don Overcash has asked the 8th Judicial District Court to stop the city from enforcing a new $130 cap on contributions to local electoral campaigns.
Groups such as the Committee to Recall Don Overcash have historically been able to accept donations of any size. But since the 2020 election, the city says it has re-evaluated its charter and developed new campaign finance rules that would apply to issue committees such as the recall group.
In short, issue committees would have to observe the same inflation-adjusted cap on donations that has been in place for candidates and candidate committees since 2007.
Loveland attorney and committee representative Troy Krenning described the change as an attempt by city staffers to meddle with the recall campaign.
