[EL] Slate column on soft money/more news

[Trevor Potter]

We've been around this ring before-ad nauseum-in connection with Jim's Advisory Opinion request last Summer, which made the same argument--and which the FEC rejected.  It is of course a misnomer to say that SuperPac funds are  "fully federally regulated" as they have no limitations as to size, and allow sources of funds not otherwise permitted in federal elections.

Trevor Potter

Sent from my iPad

On Oct 25, 2011, at 5:34 PM, "JBoppjr at aol.com" <JBoppjr at aol.com> wrote:

>     Is all money some one doesn't like "soft money?"  Money contributed to super PACs is fully federally regulated so it is, in the slang, "hard money."  Jim Bopp
>  
> In a message dated 10/25/2011 3:04:04 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, rhasen at law.uci.edu writes:
> “Super-Soft Money: How Justice Kennedy paved the way for ‘SuperPACS’ and the return of soft money’
> 
> Posted on October 25, 2011 12:02 pm by Rick Hasen
> I have written this Jurisprudence essay for Slate. It begins:
> 
> Soft money is coming back to national politics, and in a big way. And we can blame it all on a single sentence in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s opinion in 2010’s controversial Citizens United decision—a sentence that was unnecessary to resolve the case.
> 
> In this election cycle, “superPACs” will likely replace political parties as a conduit for large, often secret contributions, allowing an end run around the $2,400 individual contribution limit and the bar on corporate and labor contributions to federal candidates.
> 
> Another snippet:
> 
> Now comes the most audacious argument in this series so far. If all PACs are Super-PACs, then the rules for these PACs should also apply to “leadership PACs.” Leadership PACs are political committees that sitting members of Congress (and others) set up to allow them to make contributions to other candidates and spend money to support their election. It is a way for a member of Congress to build influence.
> 
> Sen. Mike Lee’s Leadership PAC, the Constitutional Conservatives Fund PAC, has just asked the Federal Election Commission for permission to collect unlimited contributions from corporations, labor unions, and wealthy individuals for independent spending to elect other candidates. The SuperPAC’s lawyers argue that there’s no danger of corrupting these other candidates, because its spending to help them get elected will be independent of those candidates.
> 
> Even if we suspend disbelief and agree on this point, the request ignores the greater danger: that the leader of the leadership PAC will become, or appear, corrupt. Corporations or labor unions (acting through other organizations to shield their identity from public view) could give unlimited sums to an elected official’s leadership PAC, which could then be used for the official to yield influence with others.
> 
> There’s nothing to stop someone like Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell from effectively becoming the fundraising arm of the Republican Party, funneling all the money through his leadership PAC. The McCain-Feingold law barred political parties from collecting such unlimited “soft money” contributions, and the Supreme Court in 2003 upheld that limit on the grounds that such unlimited fundraising by politicians could corrupt politicians or create the appearance of corruption.
> 
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off
> “State voter ID measure expected to see some changes in Senate”
> 
> Posted on October 25, 2011 7:53 am by Rick Hasen
> News from Pa.
> 
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> Posted in election administration, voter id | Comments Off
> Give the People What They Want
> 
> Posted on October 25, 2011 7:52 am by Rick Hasen
> Dean Logan will try in L.A. (h/t The Kinks)
> 
> <share_save_171_16.png>
> Posted in election administration | Comments Off
> -- 
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election

<- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ->
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, 
we inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, 
any tax advice contained in this communication (including any 
attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and 
cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related 
penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii)  promoting, 
marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related 
matter addressed herein. 
 
This message is for the use of the intended recipient only.  It is
from a law firm and may contain information that is privileged and
confidential.  If you are not the intended recipient any disclosure,
copying, future distribution, or use of this communication is
prohibited.  If you have received this communication in error, please
advise us by return e-mail, or if you have received this communication
by fax advise us by telephone and delete/destroy the document.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20111025/6aab2d9e/attachment.html>