[EL] Lowenstein's Integrity
Steve Hoersting
hoersting at gmail.com
Wed Apr 18 12:24:56 PDT 2012
Fair enough! ;)
Steve
On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 3:22 PM, Lowenstein, Daniel <lowenstein at law.ucla.edu
> wrote:
> I prefer even "ELB News and Commentary" to this subject heading.
> Especially if the subject threatens to invite close scrutiny!
>
> Best,
>
> Daniel H. Lowenstein
> Director, Center for the Liberal Arts and Free Institutions
> (CLAFI)
> UCLA Law School
> 405 Hilgard
> Los Angeles, California 90095-1476
> 310-825-5148
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Steve Hoersting [hoersting at gmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 11:30 AM
> To: Lowenstein, Daniel
> Cc: Edward Still; law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: Re: [EL] Lowenstein's Integrity
>
> I think the list owes a debt to Dan Lowenstein for bringing up the matter
> so forthrightly.
>
> Dan writes, "it is not surprising that the great majority of people on
> this list have been uninterested in this matter." It is true.
>
> I think there are multiple reasons for this, leaving aside the ideological
> disinterest that may be attributed to some on the left.
>
> First, there is an instrumentalism in reform. This surprises no one. As
> Cleta Mitchell once put it, baseball fans who want the mound raised three
> inches favor pitchers...Full stop. Mark Schmitt has written that,
> “[L]iberal activists turned from other issues to … questions of process[.]
> After several years on Capitol Hill working on education, urban
> development, welfare reform, and taxes, I became convinced that we were
> spinning our wheels…. [C]ampaign finance would be the reform that made all
> other reforms possible.”
>
> Second, is the matter of c3 organizations. Any c3 that would explore this
> matter now would worry, I would hope incorrectly and unnecessarily , that
> they would risk an investigation from the IRS on the matter of
> "participating or intervening" in the 2012 election.
>
> Third, any young buck (or doe) at a university who would pursue the facts
> in pursuit of tenure would likely forfeit tenure in the process. (Don't
> say you don't know what I mean). Any professor who held tenure already
> would make hallway conversations uncomfortable at the height of her career,
> and diminish her chances of visiting anywhere interesting.
>
> Fourth, is the matter of facts -- which, I gather PowerLine has. Even the
> FEC may not be willing or able to get to the bottom this. After all -- and
> this is a point I once heard made at lunch -- what is a "material"
> violation worthy of pursuing on $750M in campaign funds raised? Is it $1M
> in potentially foreign funds? $2M?
>
> Fifth is this point -- one I am not eager to make, but recognize needs
> making nonetheless: Anyone who surmises enough to investigate whether
> there is, indeed, a problem with a powerful player's fundraising practices
> doesn't want to be seen taking on any player confident in his power to the
> point he who would consider engaging in such fundraising practices. I
> think there is analog here to the editorial regarding ALEC matter published
> in today's WSJ. Really: Who wants to tangle with a Media Matters or Color
> of Change when anyone who would tangle with them can surmise the way the
> game is played by Media Matters or Color of Change? Easier to pull out
> your money and hope others are working the problem, or that it simply goes
> away.
>
> Plaudits again to Dan Lowenstein, Ed Still and PowerLine,
>
> Steve Hoersting
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 1:10 PM, Lowenstein, Daniel <
> lowenstein at law.ucla.edu<mailto:lowenstein at law.ucla.edu>> wrote:
> That the Obama online fundraising system is set up to easily
> facilitate violation of campaign finance laws has been pretty thoroughly
> documented by Power Line. See:
>
>
> http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/04/dubious-donations-2012-edition.php
>
>
> http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/04/dubious-donations-illustrated.php
>
>
> http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/04/dubious-donations-illustrated-bin-laden-edition.php
>
> http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/04/dubious-donations-contd.php
>
>
> http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/04/dubious-donations-illustrated-illegal-contributor-edition.php
>
> I don't know for a fact whether the Obama people had to override
> defaults to employ a system so lax, but it seems likely, given how unusual
> their system is. Furthermore, there was similar documentation of the same
> problem with Obama's 2008 online fundraising. So even if the campaign did
> no overriding, it can surely be charged with knowledge that it is
> facilitating illegal contributions (whether because the contributions
> themselves are illegal because they exceed limits, come from foreign
> sources, etc., or because they will not be properly reported).
>
> Given the unfortunate rise of partisanship in election law, it
> is not surprising that the great majority of people on this list have been
> uninterested in this matter, which would surely be raising a storm if it
> were, say, the Romney online fundraising that were in question. But I have
> been surprised that the smaller number of Republican voices on this
> listserv have not raised the issue. Kudos, by the way, to Ed Still for
> looking into it in a disinterested manner.
>
> Best,
>
> Daniel H. Lowenstein
> Director, Center for the Liberal Arts and Free Institutions
> (CLAFI)
> UCLA Law School
> 405 Hilgard
> Los Angeles, California 90095-1476
> 310-825-5148<tel:310-825-5148>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu> [
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:
> law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu>] On Behalf Of Edward Still
> [still at votelaw.com<mailto:still at votelaw.com>]
> Sent: Wednesday, April 18, 2012 8:36 AM
> To: law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 4/18/12
>
> I just made a contribution to Obama under part of my legal name that does
> not match my credit card name. "Your donation was successful," the site
> told me.
>
> So, is the last name enough to clear the credit card validation check?
>
> Edward Still
> Edward Still Law Firm LLC
> 130 Wildwood Parkway, Suite 108, PMB 304
> Birmingham AL 35209
> 205-320-2882<tel:205-320-2882> (voice & fax)
> still at votelaw.com<mailto:still at votelaw.com><mailto:still at votelaw.com
> <mailto:still at votelaw.com>>
> www.votelaw.com/blog<http://www.votelaw.com/blog><
> http://www.votelaw.com/blog>
> www.edwardstill.com<http://www.edwardstill.com><
> http://www.edwardstill.com/>
> www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill<http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill><
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill><
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/edwardstill>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 18, 2012 at 9:40 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:
> rhasen at law.uci.edu><mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>>>
> wrote:
>
> A Reader Complaint About Obama Campaign’s Credit Card Policies<
> http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33091>
> Posted on April 17, 2012 3:15 pm<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33091> by
> Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> A regular reader (who also regularly disagrees with me) sends along the
> following comment:
>
> Rick, I’m a bit curious: Is it that you don’t believe the story about
> Obama’s credit card processing software being set to accept donations under
> names and addresses that don’t match the card used? (You should, I tested
> it myself. You could prove it yourself with a few minutes effort.) Or is it
> that you just don’t give a damn? This matter is very troubling to me: A
> major candidate for President, already holding the office, is, for the
> second time, deliberately (It required over-riding default settings.)
> managing his collection of donations in such a way as to facilitate
> violations of campaign finance laws. You know, the guy who’s job
> description is “seeing the law faithfully executed”? And the media won’t
> bother to report it, and people who make a big fuss about these sorts of
> laws just blow it off. I might think some of these laws foolish, and some
> of them even unconstitutional, but deliberate lawlessness on the part of
> candidates for public office ought to be worth reporting, and caring about.
>
> >From what I’ve seen of campaigns and audit, I have a hard time believing
> that the Obama campaign (or any other presidential campaign) which I have
> seen has been taking steps to affirmatively encourage taking illegal
> donations (either from foreign sources, or other prohibited sources). But
> I thought I would post this because I do receive fairly frequent complaints
> on this issue. (I should add that I have not verified that the software
> has been set in any special way, or that this can facilitate fraud.) And
> if there is something worth investigating, now the word is “out there” and
> people can investigate.
>
> <
> http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D33091&title=A%20Reader%20Complaint%20About%20Obama%20Campaign%E2%80%99s%20Credit%20Card%20Policies&description=
> >
> Posted in campaigns<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<
> http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12> | Comments Off
> “<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=33088>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu>
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
>
>
>
> --
> Stephen M. Hoersting
>
>
--
Stephen M. Hoersting
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120418/839cd90f/attachment.html>
View list directory