[EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/2/11

Tue Aug 2 11:38:54 PDT 2011

I’m not sufficiently familiar with California law to speak to what it allows and does not allow regarding political contributions via text message, but I did want to highlight for listers the fact that the FEC considered this issue last year in Advisory Opinion 2010-23-and the issue at the federal level is a bit more complicated than whether there exists “a default position under  . . . campaign finance laws that all political activity involving money is presumptively illegal unless the government says you can do it.”  

The SF Chronicle article reads: “The plan would make donating any amount to a state or local campaign as easy as texting a donation to a disaster relief fund or a charity, said FPPC Chair Ann Ravel.”  AO 2010-23 responds to a request by CTIA-The Wireless Association for the FEC’s opinion as to the legality of CTIA facilitating the making of anonymous small contributions to federal political committees via text message, citing the Red Cross’ use of its technology to raise funds for earthquake relief efforts in Haiti in 2010.  AO 2010-23 makes clear that there is no such “default position . . . that political activity involving money is presumptively illegal” but that, instead, there are duly enacted statutes and regulations placing certain requirements and restrictions on political activity involving money.  For example, federal law requires that political contributions processed by intermediaries be forwarded to the intended recipien!
 ts within a specified time frame.  CTIA’s proposal would not have complied with this requirement.  Federal law also prohibits anonymous contributions in excess of $50, and CTIA had not yet fully developed a means of complying with this requirement.  In AO 2010-23, all three draft advisory opinions concluded that CTIA’s overall plan would not be permissible under current law.  The draft approved by the Commission garnered a 6-0 vote.

One may agree or disagree with these existing, duly enacted legal restrictions and requirements, but such restrictions and requirements do not constitute a default position.  Existing laws should be enforced or amended or repealed.    I suspect that the FPPC is dealing with regulations on the books that need to be amended or repealed in order to accommodate this new use of new technology.

Paul Seamus Ryan

FEC Program Director & Associate Legal Counsel

The Campaign Legal Center

215 E Street NE

Washington, DC 20002

Ph. (202) 736-2200 ext. 14

Mobile Ph. (202) 262-7315

Fax (202) 736-2222

Website: http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/

Blog: http://www.clcblog.org/

To sign up for the CLC Blog, visit: http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/index.php?option=com_forme&fid=1&Itemid=63

Follow us on Twitter @CampaignLegal <http://bit.ly/j8Q1bg>  

Become a fan on Facebook <http://on.fb.me/jroDv2> 

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Bill Maurer
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 1:08 PM
To: Daniel Tokaji; law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/2/11

I find the assumptions inherent in the article about California campaign donations via text very interesting (less interesting is its erroneous description of the holding of Citizens United).  It seems to suggest that the default position under California’s campaign finance laws is that all political activity involving money is presumptively illegal unless the government says you can do it.  (“California is poised to become the first state to allow residents to donate to a state or local political campaign on their cell phones…”)  While I agree with the FPPC that this is a good idea, I thought under the First Amendment and the California Constitution, the default is that the government doesn’t get to tell us what we can and can’t do with regard to political activity.  My question to my California colleagues is, is it really the default position of the PRA that it bans everything and then allows the government to create exceptions or is !
 this simply a misunderstanding of the author, the people he interviewed, and the FPPC itself?

Thanks in advance,

Bill Maurer

________________________________

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Daniel Tokaji
Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:16 AM
To: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 8/2/11

“Driehaus wins abortion billboard battles” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21258>  

Posted on August 2, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21258>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

See this story <http://news.cincinnati.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/201108011744/NEWS0108/110801040>  on former U.S. Rep. Steve Driehaus’ win over an anti-abortion group that ran ads against him that he believed to be misleading. U.S. District Judge Timothy Black’s order reportedly allows Driehaus’ defamation lawsuit against the Susan B. Anthony List to proceed.

  <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21258&title=%E2%80%9CDriehaus%20wins%20abortion%20billboard%20battles%E2%80%9D&description=> 

Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>  | Comments Off 

Judicial Retentions Election Conference <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21265>  

Posted on August 2, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21265>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

The two-day conference <http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202509221504&src=EMC-Email&et=editorial&bu=National%20Law%20Journal&pt=NLJ.com-%20Daily%20Headlines&cn=20110802nlj&kw=Judicial%20retention%20elections%20on%20the%20agenda&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1>  will take place at the University of Denver on August 11-12.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21265&title=Judicial%20Retentions%20Election%20Conference&description=> 

Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>  | Comments Off 

Judge Silberman Acquitted of Bribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21261>  

Posted on August 2, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21261>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

The LA Times reports here <http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-judge-bribery-verdict-20110802,0,2230584.story>  on the verdict in the case, in which Judge Harvey Silberman was accused of bribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21106>  for allegedly offering to pay an opponent’s filing fees if she would drop out of the race.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21261&title=Judge%20Silberman%20Acquitted%20of%20Bribery&description=> 

Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>  | Comments Off 

California Redistricting Roundup <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21254>  

Posted on August 2, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21254>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Lots of analysis of and commentary on the California Citizens Redistricting Commission plans approved Friday:  SacBee <http://www.sacbee.com/2011/08/02/3809943/remap-a-mixed-bag-for-asian-communities.html> , SF Chronicle <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/kalw/detail?entry_id=94451> , Daily News <http://www.dailynews.com/opinions/ci_18596559> , Voice of OC <http://voiceofoc.org/countywide/article_b4b500f6-bc91-11e0-8276-001cc4c002e0.html> , Patch.com <http://eaglerock.patch.com/articles/northeast-la-redistricting-whos-in-whos-out> , CA Independent Voter Network <http://caivn.org/article/2011/08/02/consternation-ensues-redistricting-commission-releases-final-maps> , OneNewsNow <http://www.onenewsnow.com/Politics/Default.aspx?id=1403306> , and KQED <http://blogs.kqed.org/capitalnotes/2011/08/01/competition-communities-dominate-redistricting-reactions/> .  The LA Times has this tool <http://www.latimes.com/news/la-redistricting-map-july-2011,0,3633335.htmlstory#37.42166,-119.!
 27199999999999,6,usCongress,,,current>  for comparing the current and proposed districts.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21254&title=California%20Redistricting%20Roundup&description=> 

Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>  | Comments Off 

Waterstone on AAPD v. Harris <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21246>  

Posted on August 2, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21246>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

The following is a guest post from Michael Waterstone <http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/waterstone.html> : 

Thanks to Dan and Rick for inviting me to post on the recent opinion in AAPD v. Harris <http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200715004.reh.pdf> .  As Dan notes <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21187> , the wheels of justice have moved slowly on this case.  The original district court opinion (from 2004) is in an earlier edition of my disability law casebook <http://west.thomson.com/blanck-hill-siegal-waterstones-disability-civil-rights-law-policy-cases/147894/40752995/productdetail> .  It held that voting machines requiring voters with visual impairments to vote with third-party assistance violated Title II of the ADA.  The Eleventh Circuit previously reversed the district court, holding that plaintiffs did not have a private right of action to enforce the ADA.  This decision holds that voting machines are not a facility and therefore are not covered by one of the regulations implementing Title II of the ADA. … Continue reading → <http://electionlawblog.o!
 rg/?p=21246> 

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21246&title=Waterstone%20on%20AAPD%20v.%20Harris&description=> 

Posted in voting technology <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>  | Comments Off 

“Calif. Poised to OK Political Donations via Text” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21243>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21243>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

The FPPC is backing the idea <http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/07/31/MN4P1KGQML.DTL> .  Just please don’t do it while <http://www.cnbc.com/id/31545004/site/14081545>  driving <http://www.caranddriver.com/features/09q2/texting_while_driving_how_dangerous_is_it_-feature> .

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21243&title=%E2%80%9CCalif.%20Poised%20to%20OK%20Political%20Donations%20via%20Text%E2%80%9D&description=> 

Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>  | Comments Off 

Setback for Opponents of Ohio Election Law <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21239>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21239>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Ohio AG Mike DeWine has rejected summary language <http://www.wfmj.com/story/15189393/oh-election-law-foes-fail-hurdle-in-repeal-effort>  proposed by a group seeking to overturn a recently enacted state statute that, among other things, limits the period for early voting.  The group, Fair Elections Ohio <http://www.couragepac.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/FAIR-ELECTIONS-OHIO-Summary-Update.pdf> , hopes to gather 231,000 valid signatures for its referendum by September 29, to stop the law from going into effect <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=20847>  in 2012.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21239&title=Setback%20for%20Opponents%20of%20Ohio%20Election%20Law&description=> 

Posted in absentee ballots <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=53> , election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> , petition signature gathering <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=39>  | Comments Off 

Americans Elect to Filter Candidates Based on Ideology <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21232>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21232>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Richard Winger has this post <http://www.ballot-access.org/2011/07/31/americans-elect-official-suggests-candidate-certification-committee-will-bar-candidates-from-nomination-process-based-on-their-political-views/>  on Americans Elect’s intent to  “mak[e] sure we have candidates who bridge the center of American public opinion,” as its chief operating officer is quoted saying in a CSM story <http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2011/0729/Americans-Elect-launches-centrist-third-party-bid-amid-Washington-dysfunction> .

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21232&title=Americans%20Elect%20to%20Filter%20Candidates%20Based%20on%20Ideology&description=> 

Posted in ballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46>  | Comments Off 

“9th Circuit Denies Rehearing in Renzi Case” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21229>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21229>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Legal Times has this post <http://legaltimes.typepad.com/blt/2011/08/9th-circuit-denies-rehearing-in-rick-renzi-case.html>  on the one-page order declining to rehear the Speech or Debate Clause case en banc.  No dissents, although some predict <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19623>  a cert grant.  You can find Rick’s post on the panel opinion here <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=19547> .

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21229&title=%E2%80%9C9th%20Circuit%20Denies%20Rehearing%20in%20Renzi%20Case%E2%80%9D&description=> 

Posted in Speech or Debate Clause <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=36>  | Comments Off 

Seventh Circuit Enjoins Contribution Limits to Super PAC <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21225>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21225>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

The court’s brief order <http://www.jamesmadisoncenter.org/cases/files/2011/08/7-Doc-14-Order-Granting-Doc-9-1.pdf>  allows Wisconsin Right to Life State PAC to receive unlimited contributions, to be used for independent expenditures in the state recall elections later this month.   It also expedites the appeal, with oral argument to take place in mid-September.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21225&title=Seventh%20Circuit%20Enjoins%20Contribution%20Limits%20to%20Super%20PAC&description=> 

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>  | Comments Off 

Chapin’s New Blog <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21218>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21218>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Electiongeek extraordinaire Doug Chapin, formerly of Pew/electionline and now of University of Minnesota’s Humphrey School, has started a new blog <http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/peea/>  on election administration.  His inaugural post is here <http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/peea/2011/07/welcome.php> .  Welcome (back) to the blogosphere, Doug!

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21218&title=Chapin%E2%80%99s%20New%20Blog&description=> 

Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> , election law biz <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=51>  | Comments Off 

New NY Redistricting Blog <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21216>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21216>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Common Cause New York has started <http://www.citizenredistrictny.org/2011/07/introducing-the-mapping-democracy-blog/>  the Mapping Democracy Blog <http://www.citizensredistrictny.org/blog/> , to track redistricting developments in the state.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21216&title=New%20NY%20Redistricting%20Blog&description=> 

Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>  | Comments Off 

“Wall Street Continues to Spend Big on Lobbying” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21214>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21214>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

NYT’s Dealbook reports here <http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2011/08/01/wall-street-continues-to-spend-big-on-lobbying/> .

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21214&title=%E2%80%9CWall%20Street%20Continues%20to%20Spend%20Big%20on%20Lobbying%E2%80%9D&description=> 

Posted in lobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>  | Comments Off 

Suspicious Absentee Ballot Mailers in WI <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21212>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21212>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Politico has this report <http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0811/AFP_Wisconsin_ballots_have_late_return_date.html?showall>  and TPM this post <http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/08/koch-group-mails-suspicious-absentee-ballot-letters-in-wisconsin.php?ref=fpblg>  alleging that the conservative group Americans for Prosperity Wisconsin is sending out absentee ballot applications <http://www.politico.com/static/PPM187_ballotapp.html>  with instructions to return the ballot “before August 11.”  The problem?  They’ve allegedly been sent to Democratic voters in places where the recall election of Republican state senators will take place August 9.   Also, according to TPM, the return envelope address is one that’s been used by conservative group Wisconsin Family Action.  This sounds like too clumsy a voter deception scheme to be true.

Update:  The Wisconsin Government Accountability Board has issued this warning <http://gab.wi.gov/node/1994>  about unofficial absentee voter applications.

Update 2:  The Wisconsin Democratic Party is reportedly planning to file a complaint <http://www.politico.com/blogs/davidcatanese/0811/Wisc_Dems_accuse_AFP_of_election_tampering_.html>  against AFP with the GAB.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21212&title=Suspicious%20Absentee%20Ballot%20Mailers%20in%20WI&description=> 

Posted in chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>  | Comments Off 

Best Wishes to Paul Gronke <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21208>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21208>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

My friend and ELJ co-editor Paul Gronke has shattered a vertabrae, doing things no 50-year old should do while whitewater rafting on the McKenzie River.  He nevertheless seems to be in good spirits, writing that “TSA body pat downs may be in my future.”  If you’re one of his many Facebook friends, you can send your wishes for a speedy recovery there.  If not, I’m happy to pass them along - I don’t want to be responsible for his inbox overflowing when he wakes up from surgery!

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21208&title=Best%20Wishes%20to%20Paul%20Gronke&description=> 

Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>  | Comments Off 

GOP Files Complaint over Possible Coordination Between WI Recall Candidate and Outside Group <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21201>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21201>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

The Fox Point-Bayside Patch reports here <http://foxpoint.patch.com/articles/gop-files-complaint-over-possible-collusion-between-pasch-and-special-interest-group>  on the complaint <http://foxpoint.patch.com/articles/gop-files-complaint-over-possible-collusion-between-pasch-and-special-interest-group#pdf-7221013>  asking that the Wisconsin Government Accountability Board investigate whether there’s been unlawful coordination between Democrat Sandi Pasch and Citizen Action of Wisconsin, on whose board she sits.

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21201&title=GOP%20Files%20Complaint%20over%20Possible%20Coordination%20Between%20WI%20Recall%20Candidate%20and%20Outside%20Group&description=> 

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>  | Comments Off 

“Super PACs raise a combined $26 million in first half of year” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21196>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21196>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

Sunlight Foundation’s blog has this post <http://reporting.sunlightfoundation.com/2011/super-pacs-raise-combined-26-million-first-half-year/> .

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21196&title=%E2%80%9CSuper%20PACs%20raise%20a%20combined%20%2426%20million%20in%20first%20half%20of%20year%E2%80%9D&description=> 

Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>  | Comments Off 

11th Circuit Says Voting Machines Aren’t “Facilities” Protected by ADA Regs <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21187>  

Posted on August 1, 2011 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=21187>  by Dan Tokaji <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=5>  

An 11th Circuit panel has issued this opinion <http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200715004.reh.pdf>  in AAPD v. Harris - yes, that’s Katherine Harris - an almost ten-year old case alleging that Florida’s voting machines aren’t sufficiently accessible to people with disabilities.  In so doing, the panel withdrew an opinion issued last year <http://www.ca11.uscourts.gov/opinions/ops/200715004.pdf> , which rejected plaintiffs’ claim on the ground that they lacked a private right of action to enforce the Americans with Disabilities Act regulations.  (I’ve discussed the thorny question of when election-related federal laws are privately enforceable in this article <http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1648998> .)

The new opinion, written by Judge Tjoflat after a petition for rehearing, reaches the same result for an entirely different reason.   The panel abandons the private-right-of-action rationale, instead holding that voting machines aren’t a facility and therefore aren’t covered by the regulation implementing Title II of the ADA, the basis for the only remaining claim.  The opinion reasons:  “[T]he ‘facilities’ at issue in [the regulation] are permanent, physical structures, and those objects affixed to that physical structure. Voting machines, which are wheeled into-and out of-voting precincts on election day, do not fall under this umbrella.” 

I’m curious about ADA experts’ views on the Eleventh Circuit’s reasoning or its significance for future voting access cases.

Update:  Doug Chapin has more in this post <http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/peea/2011/08/new_federal_case_says_voting_m.php> .

 <http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D21187&title=11th%20Circuit%20Says%20Voting%20Machines%20Aren%E2%80%99t%20%E2%80%9CFacilities%E2%80%9D%20Protected%20by%20ADA%20Regs&description=> 

Posted in voting technology <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>  | Comments Off 

Daniel Tokaji | Professor of Law

The Ohio State University | Moritz College of Law

55 W. 12th Ave. | Columbus, OH 43210

614.292.6566 | tokaji.1 at osu.edu 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110802/a2ecf208/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 1551 bytes
Desc: image001.gif
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20110802/a2ecf208/attachment.gif>