In The News
More Soft Money Hard Law: Still More on the Disclosure Wars: Issues Speech, Both The “Real” and the “Phony”
Bob Bauer
The 10th Circuit decided another disclosure case, Coalition for Secular Government v. Williams, on the mandatory reporting of “issue speech”. It held that an individual collecting small sums to wage a campaign on ballot questions did not have to comply with registration and disclosure requirements applicable under state law to “issue committees.” The “committee” that was really just a one-person enterprise was too “small scale,” the government’s interests too limited: the cost in the particular case exceeded the benefits.
Did this result turn in any way on the nature of the advocacy – – that it was on issues, not for or against candidates? The courts have long distinguished electoral from issue speech in determining the scope of constitutional protections.
Campaign Spending Effectiveness
Washington Post: The 2016 race is exposing the utter impotence of the ‘billionaire class’
Editorial Board
We share widespread concern over the influence of money in politics. This is a far cry, however, from believing that the system has been permanently rigged by the “billionaire class.” Ironically, this year’s presidential campaign, fueled so powerfully by such accusations of total corruption, has done much to disprove the claim…
The unpredicted success of the campaigns of Mr. Sanders and Donald Trump, the self-funding billionaire who drubbed Mr. Bush, casts doubt on their own claims on the stump, to the effect that American democracy has been permanently purchased by special interests. Region, race and candidate personality play a role. Insurgents can be heard, contrary to much rhetoric. Most of all, while we disagree with many of Mr. Sanders’s ideas, not to mention Mr. Trump’s, the success of their campaigns show that ideas and policies still do matter in politics, sometimes more than money.
Independent Groups
The Guardian: ‘A lot of fundraisers are disappointed’: why can’t the Super Pacs stop Trump?
Peter Stone
The failure of Super Pacs to make a crucial impact has caused lots of heartburn for GOP fundraisers and numerous mega donors. And those frustrations have only deepened with the growing strength of the billionaire Donald Trump who, flaunting his outsider shtick, has regularly bashed his rivals for their reliance on Super Pacs and big donors, while garnering enormous free media coverage with verbal bombshells.
“Those big expensive ads didn’t have the impact we hoped they would,” said Mel Sembler, a Florida shopping mall magnate who was a top fundraiser for the Jeb Bush-backing Right to Rise Super Pac which hauled in about $119m, but spent only a few million targeting Trump. “The antics that Trump puts on get him all the air time.”
American Prospect: Big Money Turned Upside Down
Eliza Newlin Carney
When it comes to political money, the 2016 presidential general election campaign appears likely to become a contest between convention and chaos—between a consummate establishment fundraiser and a party renegade who thumbs his nose at big donors and at the consultant class.
The rule-breaker, of course, is billionaire businessman Donald Trump, who as a largely-self financed candidate has trumpeted his independence from special interest donors and Wall Street-backed super PACs. Trump’s $25 million campaign account is far smaller than those of his GOP rivals, yet wall-to-wall media coverage has helped him win one primary after another, including seven on Super Tuesday that make him look increasingly unstoppable as his party’s nominee.
Politico: Paul Ryan disavows super PAC pushing White House run
Nolan D. McCaskill
“We have become aware of the recent formation of an organization calling itself the ‘Committee To Draft Speaker Ryan,’” Timothy Kronquist, a partner at Holtzman Vogel Josefiak Torchinsky PLLC, wrote to FEC Commission Secretary Shawn Woodhead Werth.
The super PAC registered with the FEC on Thursday. David Satterfield, who is listed on the filing, declined to comment to POLITICO but said more news would come Friday.
The letter unequivocally disavows the super PAC. “Speaker Ryan has repeatedly announced publicly that he is not running for President in 2016,” Kronquist wrote. “It is the Speaker’s sincere hope that donors and supporters are not confused by, or misled into supporting, this organization.”
Influence
San Antonio Express-News: Appeals court candidate benefits from familiar name
Gilbert Garcia
Scott Walker was one of the presidential campaign’s big duds…
But Walker’s name demonstrated surprising vote-getting power Tuesday, not in Wisconsin, but in a race for the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.
A little-known North Texas attorney, who happens to share the Wisconsin governor’s name, easily won a plurality of the vote in a crowded GOP field that included respected San Antonio District Court Judge Sid Harle.
Walker achieved this coup by breaking all the political rules. He raised no money at all, according to campaign finance reports. He did no advertising. He made few public appearances, entrusting most of that work to his son/campaign manager. He received no newspaper endorsements.
Dangers of Disclosure
Wall Street Journal: Corporate Political Spending Becomes Compliance Issue
Mara Lemos Stein
“Companies need to think strategically about these issues,” said Zachary Parks, special counsel in Covington & Burling’s Washington D.C. office. “Companies that ignore disclosure initiatives have been the target of shareholder resolutions, bad press and lawsuits. But kitchen-sink disclosure isn’t risk free.”
In an email, Mr. Parks said that at times, disclosure also can lead to litigation or negative “name-and-shame” publicity. Establishing disclosure processes can be expensive, so companies need to weigh their particular risks and “see around the corner as to where this process is going.”
The Courts
The Hill: Ex-Sen. Larry Craig loses appeal of campaign finance violations
Megan R. Wilson
A federal appeals court upheld a lower court’s decision that ordered Craig to pay $242,535 to the government.
Government officials are not allowed to use campaign resources for personal expenses, including legal bills for charges that could have happened irrespective of whether the person is a federal officeholder…
Merrick Garland, chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, wrote a 37-page decision upholding the lower court’s ruling that Craig had violated the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA), which governs how campaign funds can be used.
“The appellants note that Senator Craig suffered ‘severe professional and personal consequences’ as a result of his arrest for disorderly conduct,” Garland wrote. “That is no doubt true, but those were not the consequences of any liability flowing from his FECA violation.”
Fox News: Group complains Democratic Rep. Van Hollen using ‘secret money’ to reveal secret money in politics
Cause of Action’s draft complaint states that Van Hollen has violated the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 by making campaign finance part of his “campaign rhetoric,” arguing he apparently “doesn’t live by the same rules and standards he would impose on others.”
A group spokesman said Wednesday the complaint has yet to be filed and suggest it likely won’t be in the near future.
The National Republican Congressional Committee tried to make a similar case in 2014 against Van Hollen but never filed a complaint.
Gyrocopter
Cleveland Plain Dealer: Man who landed gyrocopter outside US Capitol nearly collided with airplane, prosecutors say
Associated Press
Hughes has said he was trying to send a political message about the need for stronger campaign finance restrictions by flying the aircraft to Washington after taking off from Gettysburg, Pennsylvania. He told investigators during an interview after he was arrested that the only way he potentially put lives in danger was if “authorities overreacted” and tried to shoot him down.
Hughes’ attorneys argue that while Hughes broke the law, prosecutors should not respond in a way that discourages Americans from expressing their grievances about their government.
“Suppressing or even discouraging political dissidence is a very dangerous and undemocratic prospect,” his attorneys wrote.
Candidates and Campaigns
Washington Post: Sanders keeps raising millions — and spending them, a potential problem for Clinton
Anne Gearan and Matea Gold
Sanders’s ability to raise millions from small-dollar donors — and to continue to do so despite Clinton’s lead in the delegate count — has allowed him to press his case that she is overly reliant on wealthy donors.
It is that sense of outsider grievance that most threatens Clinton from the left and is forcing her to spend money and political capital, even in such states as Michigan, which votes Tuesday and where she has held a comfortable lead.
As of Saturday night, Sanders was on the cusp of collecting his 5 millionth contribution — a record-breaking figure and more than double the number of donations thatClinton has received. Yet Clinton holds a formidable lead over Sanders in delegates, and her campaign argues that it will be next to impossible for him to catch up.
The States
Bend Bulletin: Lawmakers leave Salem without taking up campaign finance reform
Taylor W. Anderson
One bill, sponsored by two Democrats running for statewide office, would have asked voters to amend the state constitution to allow for limits on campaign contributions. It didn’t get a hearing.
Another bill, led by Rep. John Huffman, R-The Dalles, faced long odds to enact changes. The bill called on Congress to hold a constitutional convention to put in the U.S. Constitution a provision allowing for campaign finance reform. State conventions can happen when two-thirds of all states call for one, which has never happened.
The bills’ failure to pass is the latest in a string of defeats for limits on the increasing amount of money it takes for a politician to get elected in Oregon…
Oregon remains one of six states with no limits on any kind of political campaign donation — from businesses, unions, political committees and individuals — even though voters have twice in recent decades tried to put them in place.
Sacramento Bee: California lawmakers reintroduce anti-Citizens United ballot measure
Alexei Koseff
After being booted from the ballot in 2014, two state senators have reintroduced an advisory measure that would poll California voters on unlimited independent campaign spending.
Senate Bill 254, from Democratic Sens. Ben Allen of Santa Monica and Mark Leno of San Francisco, would pose a nonbinding question to voters in November: Should Congress pursue a constitutional amendment to overturn the U.S. Supreme Court’s controversial 2010 Citizens United decision, which held that political spending by corporations and labor unions is protected as free speech?
The issue has been a lightning rod for liberals, who fret about a corporate takeover of elections. In July 2014, Democrats in the California Legislature approved the advisory measure over criticisms that it was merely a ploy to boost voter turnout in that year’s midterm election.
Arizona Capitol Times: Arizona bill quietly loosens dark money rules
Ryan Van Velzer, Associated Press
Spencer said he spent much of the past year working with interested parties to craft the new system that also would make it easier for candidates to run for office, increase the frequency of campaign finance reports and add key enforcement tools. Spencer said he believes changes in the law to keep donors secret are important for the democratic process.
“Political participation is depressed through disclosure,” he said adding later, “We think the draft in the bill provides the right balance between disclosure and accountability.”…
The Arizona bill would change the law to allow these groups to spend unlimited amounts on ballot measures. In addition, social welfare organizations may not have to disclose how much they spend on ballot measures in the bill’s current form.
Jackson Clarion-Ledger: No state officials enforce campaign finance laws
Mollie Bryant, Geoff Pender and Kate Royals
Secretary of State Delbert Hosemann said no one reviews campaign finance reports filed with his office, and his office doesn’t have the authority or resources to do so.
“It’s the job of the legislator or the person who ran for Legislature or the person who ran for governor or (state office),” he said. “It’s like a federal tax return. If you get audited and lied on it, you sign it under penalty of perjury.”
