[EL] Question about Crossroads AOR

[Matthew Sanderson]

I think we're actually mixing up two separate conversation threads here. I
was responding to Bob's question about the AOR, which, as I understand
it, was filed by the American Crossroads independent-expenditure-only PAC
(not American Crossroads GPS): http://saos.nictusa.com/aodocs/1188794.pdf.
I wasn't commenting on the Warren ad.

Thanks,

Matt



On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 1:35 PM, John Pomeranz
<jpomeranz at harmoncurran.com>wrote:

> **
> Actually, I believe that American Crossroads is a federal
> independent-expenditure-only political committee (unfortunately dubbed
> "SuperPAC"), but Crossroads GPS, which paid for the anti-Warren ad in
> question is a self-described 501(c)(4) -- permitted to make independent
> expenditures but not a federal political committee.
>
>
> John Pomeranz
> Harmon, Curran, Spielberg & Eisenberg, LLP
> 1726 M Street, NW, Suite 600
> Washington, DC  20036
> p: 202.328.3500
> f: 202.328.6918
> e: jpomeranz at harmoncurran.com
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] *On Behalf Of *Matthew
> Sanderson
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 29, 2011 1:17 PM
> *To:* Rick Hasen
> *Cc:* law-election at uci.edu
> *Subject:* Re: [EL] Question about Crossroads AOR
>
>   I believe the answer is that FEC rules at 110.11 dictate that
> disclaimers must be placed on any "public communication ... made by a
> political committee." Because Crossroads is a Super PAC, it must place the
> appropriate disclaimers on its ad (connoting sponsorship identity and
> candidate authorization), even if the ad is not an independent expenditure,
> electioneering communication, or "campaign ad," as you put it.
>
> So an ad can potentially feature disclaimers without being a
> "coordinated communication" because the disclaimer rules and coordinated
> communication test have different scopes.
>
> Matt
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 29, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
>
>> copying to the listserv....
>> Rick
>>
>> On 11/29/2011 9:35 AM, Bob Biersack wrote:
>> > Hi Rick,
>> > Sorry to send this to you directly - its really intended for the
>> listserv.  I have a question about one specific element in the Crossroads
>> AOR.  In question 2, they describe their intent to include what amounts to
>> "stand by your ad" language. (page 5 of the request) How can including
>> language that exists in the statute only for campaign ads not be the
>> functional equivalent of express advocacy? Doesn't this make it susceptible
>> of no other reasonable interpretation than an appeal to vote for the
>> candidate?
>> >
>> > Interesting that the burden of stand by your ad has now apparently
>> become a valuable branding technique. . .?
>> >
>> > Sent from my iPad
>>
>> --
>> Rick Hasen
>> Professor of Law and Political Science
>> UC Irvine School of Law
>> 401 E. Peltason Dr., Suite 1000
>> Irvine, CA 92697-8000
>> 949.824.3072 - office
>> 949.824.0495 - fax
>> rhasen at law.uci.edu
>> http://law.uci.edu/faculty/page1_r_hasen.html
>> http://electionlawblog.org
>> _______________________________________________
>> Law-election mailing list
>> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
>> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>>
>
>
>
> --
> www.PlayoffPAC.com <http://www.playoffpac.com/> - Beat the BCS. Save
> College Football.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>



-- 
www.PlayoffPAC.com - Beat the BCS. Save College Football.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111129/f16b01db/attachment.html>