Issue Advocacy

Free Speech Matters: The Roberts Court and the First Amendment

In this article, Brooklyn Law School Professor Joel M. Gora, a CCP Academic Advisor, examines the impact of the Roberts Court on First Amendment rights after ten years, particularly with regards to campaign finance law in cases like Citizens United v. FEC and McCutcheon v. FEC. Written as part of a symposium on “Free Speech Under Fire” […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Antonin Scalia, Arizona Free Enterprise Club’s Freedom Club PAC v. Bennett, Buckley v. Valeo, Chief Justice John Roberts, Citizens United v. FEC, Joel Gora, McCutcheon v FEC, The Roberts Court, Contribution Limits, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns, Contributions & Limits, Expenditure, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Taxpayer Financed Campaigns

The Victims of “Dark Money” Disclosure: How Government Reporting Requirements Suppress Speech and Limit Charitable Giving

In this Goldwater Institute Policy Report, author Jon Riches highlights the coordinated attack on private political speech under the banner of “dark money” and its dangerous effect on nonprofit organizations. As the report explains, anonymous political speech has been essential to democratic discourse since the founding of our republic. Indeed, ratification of the U.S. Constitution […]

Filed Under: Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure Handouts, First Amendment, Issue Advocacy, 501(c)(3)s, Dark Money, Goldwater Institute, Research (Disclosure), Disclosure, First Amendment, Issue Advocacy, Disclosure, First Amendment, Issue Advocacy, Arizona, California, Minnesota, Nevada, New York, Wisconsin

Eternal Inconsistency: The Stunning Variability in, and Expedient Motives Behind the Tax Regulation of Nonprofit Advocacy Groups

In this study, California election law attorney Allison Hayward analyzes the historical roots of the IRS’s recent scandals, and discusses how: The IRS scandal is just the latest in a series of clashes between the agency and nonprofit advocacy groups. Congress writes tax law to address short-term political goals, often ignoring long-term problems. Laws governing […]

Filed Under: Blog, Enforcement, First Amendment, IRS, IRS and the Tea Party, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, 1954 Revenue Act, Allison Hayward, Nonprofit Advocacy, Revenue Act of 1934, Social Welfare, Tax Exemptions, Enforcement, First Amendment, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Enforcement, First Amendment, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation

Misusing Disclosure: How a Policy Intended to Increase Voter Knowledge Often Misleads the Public

Misusing Disclosure How a Policy Intended to Increase Voter Knowledge Often Misleads the Public By Luke Wachob Compulsory disclosure laws force citizens who contribute to candidates or primarily political organizations to have their name, address, and employer made publicly available in a government database. Disclosure laws are intended to inform the public about the sources […]

Filed Under: Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure, Disclosure Handouts, External Relations Sub-Pages, Issue Advocacy, Research, ALEC, Brendan Eich, Center for Responsive Politics, CREW, John Edwards, Media Matters for America, Mozilla, Senator Durbin, Wesleyan Media Project, Disclosure, Issue Advocacy, Disclosure, Issue Advocacy

Overwhelmingly Opposed: An Analysis of Public and 955 Organization, Expert, and Public Official Comments on the IRS’s 501(c)(4) Rulemaking

Overwhelmingly Opposed An Analysis of Public and 955 Organization, Expert, and Public Official Comments on the IRS’s 501(c)(4) Rulemaking By Matt Nese and Kelsey Drapkin Less than seven months after news broke that the Internal Revenue Service had been singling out conservative-leaning groups’ applications for 501(c)(4) tax-exempt status for higher scrutiny, the Service proposed new […]

Filed Under: External Relations Sub-Pages, First Amendment, IRS, IRS and the Tea Party, Issue Advocacy, Issues, Research, 501(c)(4)'s, IRS Rulemaking, Kelsey Drapkin, Matt Nese, NonprofitFreedom.org, Speech Police, First Amendment, Issue Advocacy

Move to Defend: The Case against the Constitutional Amendments Seeking to Overturn Citizens United

In this essay, CCP Academic Advisor John Samples looks at the Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision. It found that Congress lacked the power to prohibit independent spending on electoral speech by corporations. A later lower-court decision, SpeechNow v. Federal Election Commission, applied Citizens United to such spending and related fundraising by individuals. Concerns about the […]

Filed Under: First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Political Committees & 527s, Research, Super PACs, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Political Committees & 527s, First Amendment, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Political Committees & 527s

Assessing the Potential Effects of Citizens United: Evidence from the States

Critics of the Supreme Court’s 2010 ruling in Citizens United argued it would lead to a flood of corporate and union cash that would warp electoral and policy outcomes. In this August 2012 paper, John Coleman and Timothy Werner test these claims by examining various campaign finance laws at the state level from 1977 through […]

Filed Under: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Issues, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Independent Speech, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation

A Longitudinal Analysis of Interest Group Influence in Retirement Policy

In this article, John C. Scott analyzes the interaction of interest groups and how they benefit each other within the retirement policy lobbying realm. Scott argues that interest groups find it mutually beneficial to belong to a network of similarly interested organizations as these networks reduce the costs for government agents when they are tasked […]

Filed Under: Issue Advocacy, Lobbying, Research, congress, interest groups, John Scott, lobbying, Issue Advocacy, Lobbying, Issue Advocacy, Lobbying

The Per Curiam Opinion of Steel: Buckley v. Valeo as Superprecedent? Clues from Wisconsin and Vermont

Randall v. Sorrell and Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC brought before the Supreme Court a variety of campaign finance regulations, from contribution limits and expenditure limits to restrictions on incorporated entities. Despite expressions of discomfort by many Justices with the way modern campaign finance is regulated, the Court declined to rework Buckley v. Valeo‘s […]

Filed Under: Contributions & Limits, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Buckley v. Valeo, Randall v. Sorrell, Wisconsin Right to Life v. FEC, Contribution Limits, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Contributions & Limits, Issue Advocacy, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Vermont, Wisconsin

Much More of the Same: Television Advertising Pre- and Post-BCRA

This chapter first appeared in The Election After Reform:  Money, Politics, and the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, edited by Michael J. Malbin (Lanham, Md.:  Rowman & Littlefield, 2006), pp. 139-162. In “Much More of the Same:  Television Advertising Pre- and Post-BCRA,” Franz et al. examine the impact of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) on campaign advertising.

After BCRA was passed, signed into law by former President Bush, and upheld by the Supreme Court, many analysts predicted that the shape and volume of television advertising would look drastically different in a post-BCRA world.  This chapter examines that notion and concludes that analysts’ predictions were drastically off the mark. In general, this study highlights three major points:  (1) the most important independent variable in almost every major model of political advertising remains the competitiveness of the race, despite changes prescribed by BCRA; (2) the “stand by your ad” provision of BCRA had negligible effects on the tone of advertising; and (3) interest groups and soft money continued to play a major role, albeit in different forms. Accordingly, the authors show that advertising in post-BCRA America is largely the same as in pre-BCRA America.

Filed Under: Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Stand By Your Ad, Uncategorized, Issue Advocacy, Issue Advocacy, Stand By Your Ad

The Center for Competitive Politics is now the Institute for Free Speech.