Blog

Legislator Occupations – Change or Status Quo After Clean Elections?

Published on May 6, 2008

File Under: "Clean" Elections, Taxpayer Financing

CCP released its second Issue Analysis today studying the impact of so-called "clean elections" programs in Maine and Arizona.

Proponents of taxpayer-financed political campaigns like to claim that such programs allow "ordinary citizens" to serve in government.

CCP looked at the data and found that forcing taxpayers to fund political campaigns has no impact on the occupational diversity of members of the legislature.

Click HERE for the full study.

Leake and SpeechNow.org: similar only at first glance

Published on May 4, 2008
by Michael Darner

File Under: Contributions & Limits, Disclosure, Jurisprudence & Litigation

As my colleague Mike Schrimpf notes, First Amendment advocates should find much to celebrate in the majority opinion of North Carolina Right to Life v. Leake.  Judge Harvie Wilkinson cleared up a multitude of vagueness problems, prevented an unaccountable board of regulators from wielding the burden of political committee status as a weapon in ideological battle, and protected groups engaging in non-electoral issue speech from unwarranted regulation.      

Professor Rick Hasen also notes the similarities between the legal arguments made by NCRL in Leake and those being made by SpeechNow.org (full-disclosure: CCP attorneys jointly represent SpeechNow.org).  On one level he is correct - the idea that groups making independent expenditures may not be subjected to contribution limits is at the heart of both cases.  As the speech of neither plaintiff, SpeechNow.org nor NCRL's Fund for Independent Political Expenditures (NCRL-FIPE), raise any danger of corruption, both groups should arguably be equally free of regulatory burdens. 

However, the similarities between the cases end there.

More after the jump. 

The regulator’s hand, once loosed, is not easily leashed

Published on May 2, 2008
by Michael Schrimpf

File Under: Political Committees & 527s

Judge Wilkinson, writing the majority opinion in North Carolina Right to Life v. Leake, declares that "the regulator's hand, once loosed, is not easily leashed."

Indeed.

NCRL v. Leake is a welcome victory for First Amendment proponents fearful of the encroachment of campaign finance regulations on core political speech. Few judges seem to better understand the stakes than Judge Wilkinson, as expressed in his addressing of the dissenting opinion.

"This is not some marginal or incidental freedom with which the dissent is dealing. Rather it is the essential freedom that defines our ability -- both individually and collectively -- to speak in unfettered fashion on the most pressing issues of the day, and to express approval or disapproval of the functioning of our representative government."

More after the jump.

FEC Stalemate

Published on May 1, 2008
by Michael Schrimpf

File Under: Faulty Assumptions

Democratic Majority Leader Harry Reid has pitched a new deal in an effort to reopen the doors at the Federal Election Commission, which remain virtually shuttered by a Senate stalemate over its nominees.  

Currently, this regulatory panel charged with overseeing campaign finance and political speech restrictions finds itself four Commissioners short and unable to act in the midst of the longest primary contest in recent memory.

Skeptics of campaign finance regulations have long voiced concerns that the FEC's primary use is as a pawn for political operatives with which to harass, intimidate, and even silence their opponents. But never before has the inanity of the entire campaign finance regime been so apparent.

The Senate deadlock arises from objections by Democratic Senators and campaign finance "reform" organizations to a nominee, Hans von Spakovsky, who served on the FEC without controversy as a recess appointment for more than a year and a half.  Nonetheless, his critics have seized on his previous tenure at the Department of Justice to obfuscate and argue that he is unfit to enforce the nation's campaign finance laws.

Not surprisingly, the so-called "reform" organizations, notably the Campaign Legal Center and Democracy21, pin the impasse squarely on Senator Mitch McConnell, a long time defender of free speech. 

Fred Wertheimer has said that shutting down the FEC is "worthy of a banana republic -- and in this case the buck stops with Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell."

Of course, the truth is much more complicated. 

More after the jump.

More thoughts on Davis

Published on April 29, 2008
by Michael Schrimpf

File Under: Contributions & Limits

This Week News published a CCP op-ed (link unavailable) on Davis v. FEC.

Highlights of the piece can be found after the jump

Clean elections and N.J. - not perfect together

Published on April 28, 2008
by Michael Schrimpf

File Under: Faulty Assumptions, Taxpayer Financing

The Record ran an op-ed cowritten by CCP president Sean Parnell on the failure of New Jersey's experiment with taxpayer-financed political campaigns.

The piece begins:

Try as they might, the lawmakers who created New Jersey's welfare-for-politicians scheme of taxpayer-subsidized political campaigns can't hide their failure.

New Jersey's Election Law Enforcement Commission recently issued a report on last fall's taxpayer-financed experiment that makes it clear that the program achieved no tangible positive results.

The Legislature barred ELEC from drawing conclusions or making recommendations. So, we offer our own assessments based on ELEC's report and our own analyses.

More after the jump.

You do SO Need Your Stinkin' Badges!

Published on April 28, 2008
by The Skeptic

The Court handed down the Crawford Indiana voter ID opinion today .  No surprise - requiring a voter to present voter ID is constitutional, overall.

Forget everything I've said!

Published on April 25, 2008
by Michael Schrimpf

Over at The Fix, Chris Cillizza has a list of the top ten strategic moves Senator McCain can make to strengthen his candidacy:

9. Stop Criticizing Outside Groups: McCain may not like all of the outside money coursing through the system but in an election where he is likely to be badly outspent by the Democratic nominee and his (or her) allied groups, McCain needs some third party spending on his side as a counterweight. McCain has made his disdain for 527s and 501(c)(4)s clear over the past few years, and the donors who fund these groups know it. Republican strategists worry that if McCain is too tough on these conservative aligned groups the donors may take their money and walk away, a situation that many GOP operatives would equate to fighting the general election with one hand tied behind their backs.

CCP flashback:

"527's need to be eliminated...these so-called 527's - 527s are a disgrace and they have to be eliminated because they are a clear violation of the law." - John McCain, October 21, 2007

What? Me Worry?

Published on April 25, 2008
by The Skeptic

File Under: Political Committees & 527s

McCain's ambition is apparently to dictate the terms of his presidential victory.  Unfortunately it isn't that easy.  His campaign may learn this the hard way as they experience the aftermath of his present tirade over outside groups in campaigns.

More after the jump. 

Davis and Rational Limits

Published on April 24, 2008
by The Skeptic

File Under: Contributions & Limits, Jurisprudence & Litigation

The Supreme Court's oral argument in Davis v. FEC raises deeper questions about contribution limits.  Specifically, what are they for?  In the so-called Millionaire's Amendment context, they adjust to compensate candidates who must raise funding when beleagured by a candidate with money to burn.  Ordinarily, contribution limits are suppose to place a lid on the amount of funding a candidate can take from a single source, to limit the debt - real or imagined by pundits and the public - that the candidate (if elected) will feel toward the donor.  But here?

More after the jump! 

Previous 10 

Next 10