Perkins Coie’s Mark Elias (the tall one) has submitted to the FEC an Advisory Opinion Request on behalf of “Commonsense 10.” This group, unlike many, wants to be a federal political committee. They just want to behave like none before it, but raising and spending corporate, union and large individual contributions without regard to the limits imposed on committees by federal law. Then, they want to make unlimited independent expenditures in federal elections.
“That’s nice,” you might respond. “I want a pony. But life is tough, and you can’t always get what you want.” Ah, but Elias isn’t dreaming of ponies. Instead he is predicting the combined effect of Citizens United, the appellate decisions in SpeechNow, Long Beach Chamber, and Emily’s List. Let’s review:
- Independent expenditures from whatever source (i.e. corporations and unions) are not corrupting, and protected by the Constitution;
- Limits on contributions to committees that make independent expenditures are unconstitutional;
So, it must follow that corporations and unions should be able to give money to a political committee to make independent expenditures. As Elias notes in his request, by adopting status as a political committee, Commonsense Ten will disclose its receipts and disbursements. It will also screen and refuse money from foreign nationals, government contractors, national banks and congressionally chartered corporations—voluntarily. Apparently it will leave those fights for another day.
Prediction: Whether or not Elias gets what he wants from the FEC, a fair application of current doctrine would favor his request. So, what’s next? Look for increased attention paid to claims of affiliation and coordination, especially by people who file FEC complaints. Even if Commonsense Ten gets its answer, this answer is only good so long as this (or any other) group are not deemed affiliated with a candidate or party, or to have coordinated its expenditures with them.