Maryland

Analysis of “Online Electioneering Transparency and Accountability Act” (Maryland H.B. 981)

PDF of analysis available here Analysis of “Online Electioneering Transparency and Accountability Act” (H.B. 981) By Eric Wang, Senior Fellow[1] Introduction and Executive Summary The Institute for Free Speech[2] provides the following analysis of H.B. 981,[3] which currently awaits a concurrence vote in the House of Delegates. Despite its Orwellian title, H.B. 981 is not […]

Filed Under: Blog, External Relations Comments and Testimony, State, State Comments and Testimony, disclaimers, Internet Ad Disclaimers, Internet Speech Regulation, Social Media, Maryland

Constitutional and Practical Issues with Maryland House Bill 1498

VIA U.S. MAIL AND ELECTRONIC MAIL The Honorable Larry Hogan 100 State Circle Annapolis, MD 21401-1925 RE:  Constitutional and Practical Issues with House Bill 1498 Dear Governor Hogan: On behalf of the Center for Competitive Politics (“the Center”),[1] we respectfully submit the following comments addressing constitutional and practical issues with portions of House Bill 1498, […]

Filed Under: Blog, Disclosure, Disclosure Comments, Disclosure State, External Relations Comments and Testimony, State, State Comments and Testimony, Joint-and-Several Liability, Maryland

Constitutional and Practical Issues with Maryland House Bill 898

VIA U.S. MAIL AND ELECTRONIC MAIL The Honorable Larry Hogan 100 State Circle Annapolis, MD 21401-1925 RE:  Constitutional and Practical Issues with House Bill 898 Dear Governor Hogan: On behalf of the Center for Competitive Politics (“the Center”),[1] we respectfully submit the following comments addressing constitutional and practical issues with portions of House Bill 898, […]

Filed Under: Blog, External Relations Comments and Testimony, State, State Comments and Testimony, coordination, Maryland State Board of Elections, Maryland

What would happen if the media talked about itself the way it talks about “dark money” groups?

A shadowy organization based in Washington, D.C., recently spent an undisclosed sum attempting to swing elections in far-off places such as South Dakota and California. Due to a loophole in campaign finance law, this spending does not have to be reported to the Federal Election Commission. That means the public will never know who is […]

Filed Under: Blog, Disclosure, Disclosure Press Release/In the News/Blog, Dark Money, federal election commission, The Washington Post, California, Maryland, Missouri, South Dakota, Washington

Contribution Limits Increase in 15 States and Federally after Citizens United

As this Issue Brief explains, five years after the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC, which struck down a federal law on First Amendment grounds banning corporations and labor unions from spending money independently of campaigns to urge voters to support or oppose the candidates of their choice, and the subsequent SpeechNow.org […]

Filed Under: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Federal, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contribution Limits State, Contributions & Limits, Handouts (Contribution Limits), Research, Super PACs, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Vermont, Wyoming

Unenforceable: States Respond to McCutcheon and Support the First Amendment

Unenforceable:  States Respond to McCutcheon and Support the First Amendment By Matt Nese On April 2, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which invalidated the federal aggregate limit on contributions by individuals to candidate campaigns and political committees as unconstitutional under the First Amendment.[1] This brief examines the […]

Filed Under: 1. McCutcheon, Arguments, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contribution Limits State, Contributions & Limits, External Relations Sub-Pages, Handouts (Contribution Limits), Research, aggregate limits, Center for Competitive Politics, District of Columbia, Matt Nese, McCutcheon v FEC, Proportional Bans, Proportional Limits, Shaun McCutcheon, Contribution Limits, Contributions & Limits, Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New York, South Carolina, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Wyoming

Issue Analysis No. 9: Aggregate and Proportional Limits in the States: Have they Reduced Corruption or Promoted Better Government?

The Center’s ninth Issue Analysis examines the potential impact of the Supreme Court’s McCutcheon decision on the states with existing aggregate limit provisions, particularly as it relates to the effect of those provisions on both public corruption rates and how well a state is governed. For background, on April 2, 2014, the Supreme Court issued […]

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contribution Limits State, Contributions & Limits, External Relations Sub-Pages, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, State, aggregate limits, Center for Competitive Politics, Contribution limits, First Amendment, Good Governance, Matt Nese, McCutcheon v FEC, money in politics, Pew Center on the States, Public Corruption, Shaun McCutcheon, Supreme Court, Contribution Limits, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Contributions & Limits, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Alaska, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Wyoming

State Aggregate Limits and Proportional Bans under McCutcheon

State Aggregate Limits and Proportional Bans under McCutcheon Likely Unconstitutional or Highly Vulnerable By Matt Nese Please note:  This report has been updated to reflect state responses to the Supreme Court’s McCutcheon decision. On April 2, 2014, the Supreme Court issued its decision in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, which invalidated the federal aggregate limit […]

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Federal, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contribution Limits State, Contributions & Limits, External Relations Sub-Pages, Political Parties, Research, State, State Press Releases and Blogs, aggregate limits, Base Contribution Limits, Center for Competitive Politics, District of Columbia, First Amendment, Matt Nese, McCutcheon v FEC, Quid Pro Quo, Shaun McCutcheon, Contribution Limits, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Contributions & Limits, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Political Parties, Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Hawaii, Indiana, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Montana, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee, Wisconsin, Wyoming

Legislative Review: 2013 State Legislative Trends – Campaign Contribution Limits Increase in Nine States

As this Legislative Review explains, a Center for Competitive Politics’ survey of 2013 state legislative activity shows that nine states – Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, North Carolina, and Wyoming – raised or eliminated various campaign contribution limits last year. Five states increased their limits by 100% or more, two more increased their […]

Filed Under: Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits, Contribution Limits Handouts, Contribution Limits State, Contributions & Limits, External Relations Sub-Pages, Political Committees & 527s, Political Parties, Research, 50 State Survey, Alabama, Arizona, Campaign Contribution Limits, Center for Competitive Politics, Connecticut, Corporate to Candidate Contributions, First Amendment, Florida, Illinois, Incumbency Protection, Independent Expenditures, independent spending, Individual to Candidate Contributions, Luke Wachob, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, PACs, Political Parties, State Legislative Activity, super PACs, Tennessee, Vermont, Wyoming, Contribution Limits, Political Committees & 527s, Contributions & Limits, Political Committees & 527s, Political Parties, Alabama, Arizona, Connecticut, Florida, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Vermont, Wyoming

Citizens United, States Divided: An Empirical Analysis of Independent Political Spending

This study examines the effect the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision in Citizens United v. FEC has on independent spending in American politics. Previous attempts to answer this question have focused solely on federal elections where there is no baseline for comparing changes in spending behavior. The authors, Douglas M. Spencer and Abby K. Wood, overcome […]

Filed Under: Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Independent Speech, Issues, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Research, Super PACs, 50 States, Abby K. Wood, Center for Competitive Politics, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, Corporate spending, Douglas M. Spencer, Independent Expenditures, Indepent Spending, Indiana Law Journal, money in politics, Supreme Court, Union spending, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Independent Speech, Jurisprudence & Litigation, Alabama, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia, Washington, West Virginia, Wisconsin, Wyoming

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