CCP CCP Earns Highest Rating from Charity Navigator For the third year in a row, the Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) was awarded the highest possible rating by Charity Navigator for “demonstrating strong financial health and commitment to accountability and transparency.” Charity Navigator’s coveted 4-star rating indicates that CCP exceeds industry standards in […]
For the third year in a row, the Center for Competitive Politics (CCP) was awarded the highest possible rating by Charity Navigator for “demonstrating strong financial health and commitment to accountability and transparency.” Charity Navigator’s coveted 4-star rating indicates that CCP exceeds industry standards in pursuing our mission in a financially efficient way. CCP earned […]
A recent Pacific Standard article offers a master class in how to spin run-of-the-mill issue advocacy into a spectacular conspiracy. “Awash in Dark Money, a Western Think Tank is Leading the Charge Against the Antiquities Act” is a must read, though not for the reasons the author intends. The subject – or target – of […]
Filed Under: Blog, Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure Press Release/In the News/Blog, Issues, Media Watch, Money in Politics, Antiquities Act, Dark Money, Issue Advocacy, Jimmy Tobias, Pacific Standard, Private Giving, Sutherland Institute, Utah
This week, the Supreme Court declined to hear a case challenging restrictions on political party fundraising and spending in the McCain-Feingold Act. This left in place a lower-court ruling upholding these restrictions. Following the Court’s announcement, multiple commentators have noted the implications of the decision on future challenges to McCain-Feingold and even the strength of […]
Filed Under: Blog, Issues, Media Watch, Money in Politics, Bloomberg BNA, Clarence Thomas, Gorsuch, McCain-Feingold, Neil Gorsuch, Political Parties, Republican Party of Louisiana v. FEC, Roll Call, Supreme Court, US News & World Report
Washington Examiner: New study fails to prove that money sways politicians, despite activists’ excitement (In the News)
By Joe Albanese and Brad Smith
“Money in politics” obsessives have long been frustrated at the lack of scholarly support for the notion that political spending directly alters legislative votes, which would help them to push for greater political speech restrictions. This complaint is a central theme of a new report by the progressive Roosevelt Institute, which the institute claims finally proves the link between money and policy.
The authors look at House Democrats who voted for financial regulations in the 2010 Dodd-Frank Act, but then voted to amend it in later years. They claim that political spending by the “finance industry” caused these Democrats to suspiciously “change their minds” – as if nobody can support a law while hoping to improve parts of it. The study’s methods discredit its conclusion…
Restricting how campaigns are financed necessarily involves limiting the speech and political activity needed to bring about political change. If this is the best evidence for claiming systemic corruption, there is little corresponding benefit from regulating campaign finance.
The Honorable Daniel J. Burke The Honorable Robert Rita The Honorable Joe Sosnowski Re: S.B. 1424; Taxpayer-Financed Campaigns – A Failed and Costly Policy Dear Chairperson Burke, Vice-Chairperson Rita, Republican Spokesperson Sosnowski, and Members of the House Executive Committee: On behalf of the Center for Competitive Politics (the “Center”), I respectfully submit the following comments […]
Filed Under: Blog, External Relations Comments and Testimony, State, State Comments and Testimony, Tax Financed Campaigns Comments, Tax Financed Campaigns State, Tax-Financing, Los Angeles, Arizona, California, Connecticut, Illinois, Maine, New Jersey