CCP
Votes Win Elections
By Joe Trotter
Cantor’s defeat is a black eye for the organizations and politicians claiming that we need a constitutional amendment to “protect our democracy” and elections from money in politics. The majority leader and once heir-apparent to the speakership enjoyed widespread support from various interests, with Politico reporting that Cantor received support from 377 political action committees.
So what happened? The answer is simple: our democratic system of government worked, and the candidate whose message resonated best with the constituency received the most votes.
In other words, despite the hysterics of certain politicians and groups, America’s democratic system of government is doing just fine. Votes, after all, are what still win elections.
Amending the First Amendment
More Soft Money Hard Law: “Reasonableness” and the Proposed Amendment to the Constitution on Campaign Finance
By Bob Bauer
Raskin and Abrams are in part arguing over whose position is most “reasonable.” An amendment like the one before the Committee, Raskin contends, could be written to impose only “reasonable” limits. Floyd Abrams cites Mills v. Alabama, 384 U.S. 214, 220 (1966) for the proposition that “no test of reasonableness” can save a law that criminalizes speech for or against a candidate for public office.
Now it appears that Professor Raskin judges the reasonableness of regulation by the extent to which, as he sees it, money has come to dominate politics. Desperate times call for desperate measures, he might say. The imminent danger of plutocratic control in a society in the grip of vast inequalities might move notions of “reasonableness” farther than would otherwise be the case. Floyd Abrams does not share Raskin’s apocalyptic vision of the problem, and so cannot agree that the solution Raskin offers is “reasonable.”
IRS
Wall Street Journal: FBI Returns Taxpayer Information It Got From IRS
By Devlin Barrett
The Federal Bureau of Investigation has returned a large database of taxpayer information it received from the Internal Revenue Service, amid an investigation into possible political targeting of conservative groups, the FBI’s director said on Wednesday.
Testifying before the House Judiciary Committee, James Comey said FBI investigators didn’t examine the database, which included private taxpayer information that isn’t supposed to be shared without a judge’s order. “The only thing that was done, (was) analysts looked at the table of contents,” Mr. Comey said.
Disclosure
Roll Call: Super PAC Donor Gives $585K More, Joins Top Tier (Updated)
By Kent Cooper
John Jordan, the CEO of the Jordan Winery in Healdsburg, California, has contributed $585,000 to the New Republican.org super PAC during April and May. He gave $285,000 on April 24th, and $300,000 on May 5th, which was reported today.
Candidates, Politicians, Campaigns, and Parties
Politico: Why Eric Cantor chose Bobby Van’s
By Byron Tau
Tabs at fancy D.C. steakhouses and the high overhead for Eric Cantor’s campaign drew plenty of mockery in the aftermath of his primary loss.
But lobbyists and other big donors generally don’t cut $5,000 checks over a barbacoa burrito bowl.
CPI: Outside money pouring into governors races
By Ben Wieder
Through March, the Republican Governors Association has spent five times more around the country than it did at the same point four years ago while the Democratic Governors Association’s overall spending is double what it was in 2010, according to data from the Internal Revenue Service.
Both groups are “527s,” tax-exempt organizations named for the IRS code they fall under, which can accept unlimited amounts of money from individuals, corporations and unions. Depending on state rules, the money can be given directly to candidates or as independent advertising to goose a campaign.
Lobbying and Ethics
Daily Beast: Ethics Office Sees Evidence Republican Congressman Broke the Law
By Ben Jacobs
A report released by the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE) Wednesday states that Stockman may have violated federal law by receiving illegal campaign contributions from congressional employees and then that “there is substantial reason to believe that Representative Stockman made false statements and endeavored to impede the OCE inquiry.” The report unanimously recommended that the House Ethics Committee further review the allegations.
When the OCE first reported Stockman was under investigation in April, Donny Ferguson, a spokesman for Stockman previously employed by a shady Montana PAC, claimed that this was merely a reporting error by an accountant. Based on the OCE’s report, this statement was a baldfaced lie. Instead, the report details an elaborate scheme to circumvent campaign finance laws.
State and Local
Connecticut –– The Courant: Judge Rules For State’s Campaign Finance Law
By Edmund H. Mahony
Chief U.S. District Judge Janet C. Hall denied the group’s request for a preliminary injunction. The injunction would have barred the State Elections Enforcement Commission from enforcing two campaign laws – one limiting coordination between candidates and fundraisers and a second that distinguishes between ads for a candidate and ads in support of issues.
Maine –– Press Herald: National Organization for Marriage targets gay-marriage advocates with ethics complaints
By Steve Mistler
John Eastman, board chairman for the National Organization for Marriage, promised to file complaints against his opponents immediately after the five-member Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices accepted findings from a staff investigation that NOM violated Maine law.
Eastman said the investigation singled out his organization for activity that was also practiced by groups advocating for gay marriage. That argument, along with the counter-complaints, could play into NOM’s anticipated legal appeal of the fine and the requirement to disclose the names of its 2009 donors.
Pennsylvania –– The Inquirer: Donation to GOP wrongly sent to Pa.
By Ben Finley
The Republican Governors Association transferred nearly $1 million to its Pennsylvania political action committee from casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, a blunder that appears to breach the state’s gaming act, records show.
“We made it crystal clear from the beginning that any contributions that we made could not be allocated to Pennsylvania,” Ron Reese, an Adelson spokesman, told The Inquirer.
Pennsylvania law bars casino owners and executives from giving to candidates, political parties or committees. Adelson chairs the Las Vegas Sands Corp., which owns a casino in Bethlehem.
