Daily Media Links 4/3: They’re Trying To Intimidate Us, Just Like They Did With The NAACP, and more…

April 3, 2012   •  By Joe Trotter   •  
Default Article
Independent groups

TPM Muckraker: Karl Rove: They’re Trying To Intimidate Us, Just Like They Did With The NAACP (VIDEO)
by Ryan J. Reilly
In the 1940s and 50s, a number of states attorneys general attempted to force a particular 501(c)4 to disclose its donors, the purpose was to intimidate people into not giving to that organization,” Rove said on Fox News.  
The group was the NAACP, which is a 501(c)4, has a 501(c)4 and does not disclose donors. That effort failed, in fact a Supreme Court in a 1954 case general held the right of organizations like that not to make their donors’ names public,” Rove said.

Wall Street Journal, Blog: Super PAC Takes Aim at Three NYC Incumbents
by Andrew Grossman
Three long-serving members of New York City’s congressional delegation have caught the attention of the Campaign for Primary Accountability, a new political-action committee trying to oust incumbents on both sides of the aisle during primaries.  


National Journal: Judge: Reveal Donors Behind Electioneering Ads 
by Shane Goldmacher
A federal judge has struck down a Federal Election Commission ruling that allowed groups to pay for advertising in the run-up to elections while keeping their donors anonymous. 

Colorado Independent Judge: Groups can’t shield campaign donors‎ 
by Troy Hooper
“This is good news for our democracy and for voters,” plaintiff U.S. Rep. Chris Van Hollen, D-Maryland, said in a prepared statement. Van Hollen filed the lawsuit in April 2011. “This victory will compel the FEC to require enhanced disclosures of the funders of campaign-related advertisements.” 


NY Times: A Judge Turns on the Light
A federal judge took an important step toward ending secret donations to big-spending political groups,  striking down regulations that permitted some groups to hide their donors. Unfortunately,  the ruling probably came too late to flush this corrupting practice from this year’s elections — though there is still time for Congress to do so.

Candidates and parties

NY Times: As Viewing Habits Change, Political Ads Switch Screens
by Jeremy W. Peters
Just because you own a D.V.R. or watch television online does not mean political commercials are not coming soon to a screen near you.

Washington Post: Obama campaign reviewing background of volunteer fundraiser accused of fraud 
by Carol D. Leonnig
But she is also trailed by some controversy, accused in court of defrauding a businessman out of $657,000, impersonating a bank official and dodging creditors.  

Politico: Parties keep hyping cheapo ad campaigns 
by Alexander Burns
The total cost of the campaign, according to a GOP media-tracking source, is about $1,000. That’s not missing a zero – it’s a thousand bucks across eight districts, with ads appearing in inexpensive traffic-and-weather radio segments.  

Roll Call: Durkee Case Jolts Elections  
by Amanda Becker
Victims of the California campaign treasurer who embezzled more than $7 million from dozens, if not hundreds, of clients’ accounts may have to hire private attorneys and scramble to replenish re-election funds even as the government’s case ended in a guilty plea Friday. 

Lobbying and ethics

Roll Call: Street Talk: Special Interests Descend on the Hill
by Kate Ackley
Look who’s coming to the Hill: beer distributors, medical professionals in white coats, restaurant owners, music makers and court reporters. 


NPR: Partisan Divide May Keep FEC From Heeding Judge’s Order On Ad Loophole
by Peter Overby
The FEC is in a bind. It can’t appeal the decision or take steps to comply with it unless four of the six commissioners agree. But the six member commission has a partisan split right down the middle. Controversial votes often end in a 3-to-3 deadlock.  


District of Columbia –– Sleaze City: Citizens’ Revolt Launched to Ban Corporate Control of DC Elections 
by Art Levine
The growing movement to undo the nefarious impact of the Citizens United decision allowing unlimited corporate campaign spending finds its counterpart in a citizens’ revolt against corporate control of local Washington, D.C. elections.  

Joe Trotter

Share via
Copy link
Powered by Social Snap