[EL] He's Their Guy

[Robbin Stewart]

Other independent expenditures for Smith:
 "Smith for Congress", FEC v. Central Long Island Tax Reform Immediately
Committee, 616 F.2d 45 (2d Cir. 1980) (en banc), "Vote for Smith", FEC v.
CHRISTIAN ACTION NETWORK, "Vote for Smith" FEC v. MASSACHUSETTS CITIZENS
FOR LIFE, INC., 479 U.S. 238 (1986) , "Vote for Smith", Smith  v. Cherry,
 489 F.2d 1098, "Smith for Congress", COLORADO ETHICS WATCH v. SENATE
MAJORITY FUND, LLC. This Smith fellow gets around and has wide support.
Whether it is currently legal to say "Smith for Congress" without more is a
matter of some dispute these days.

On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu>
wrote:
>
> Regarding Rick's link below to Ohio's Second Congressional District,
“Smith is the political novice and truck driver who won a surprise victory
over David Krikorian in the March Democratic primary for Ohio’s 2nd
Congressional District. Smith won even though he didn’t campaign and didn’t
raise money. He got a boost from a group calling itself the ‘Victory Ohio
Super PAC,’ a mystery outfit that paid for robocalls touting Smith but
never filed with the Federal Election Commission.”
>
> a) It's not clear that Victory Ohio Super PAC had a legal obligation to
file with the Federal Election Commission (see below); and
> b) Out here in flyover country it's no real secret why Krikorian couldn't
win a Democratic primary.
>
> In 2008, Krikorian ran for the seat as an independent, calling himself "a
true Reagan conservative." He was endorsed by the Ohio Libertarian Party.
In 2009, Krikorian was often at early rallies of various Ohio tea party
groups and COAST, a conservative group long active in Cincinnati and Ohio
politics. Even though very few Armenians or Turks live in the district,
Krikorian made the issue of the Armenian genocide of nearly a century ago a
key campaign issue. He accused incumbent Jean Schmidt of accepting $30,000
from the Turkish government to vote against a congressional resolution on
the Armenian genocide. I'm no fan of Ohio's "false statements" law (see
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/02/a-salute-to-mike-dewine.php),
but the Ohio Elections Commission did vote 5-0 that Krikorian's charges
were false.
>
> By 2010, however, Krikorian had refashioned himself as a "Howard Dean
Democrat" but lost a hard-fought Democratic nomination battle for the seat.
Although he did not make another independent bid that year, many supporters
of nominee Surla Yalamanchili felt that Krikorian had worked to undermine
Yalamanchili's candidacy. I'm no fan of Keith Olbermann, but the fact that
Olbermann once named Krikorian "worst person in the world" may indicate why
the left wing of the Democratic Party would have no love for Krikorian 18
months after "Chili's" defeat.
>
>  That the party hierarchy backed Krikorian this year was simply a
question of name recognition and fundraising ability - when no stronger
candidate stepped forward, he seemed like the best choice to put up a
competitive race in a district that Democrats will have great trouble
winning regardless of the nominee. (Schmidt, despite always being
considered a weak candidate, won the district in the landslide Democratic
years of 2006 and 2008, and beat "Chili" by 23 points in 2010. She was
defeated in the 2012 GOP primary by 6 points).
>
> In other words, Krikorian didn't lose because of robocalls by a "mystery
outfit." He lost because, in a Democratic primary, he was a really poor
candidate.
>
> Victory Ohio Super PAC, whatever that is, may have broken the law by not
registering as a PAC, and is reportedly under criminal investigation,
although nothing seems to have been reported on that in nearly 5 months
since the primary. I don't condone Victory Ohio Super PAC's lawbreaking, if
that is what it is. It is not clear, however, if Victory Ohio Super PAC
broke any laws - you don't have to register if you spend less than $1000,
and you can easily make 15,000 or more robocalls for less than $1000. But
If someone spending a bit of money made truck driver Smith (no relation)
known in the race, it again indicates the value of independent expenditures
that inform the electorate that they had a choice.
>
> Bradley A. Smith
>
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
>
>    Professor of Law
>
> Capital University Law School
>
> 303 E. Broad St.
>
> Columbus, OH 43215
>
> 614.236.6317
>
> http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
>
> ________________________________
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120810/f783fc13/attachment.html>