[EL] Xenophobia in campaign finance
Thomas J. Cares
Tom at TomCares.com
Fri Feb 10 10:09:35 PST 2012
What if China were to fund negative personal attack ads against most congressional incumbents who support US policies adverse to China's interests, and it were generally known they were doing this, but not known which ads they were funding. There'd be no risk of congressmen being swayed not to support such policies, lest a half a million dollars worth of ads highlighting their marital infidelity be run in their district (and who needs that)?
Thomas Cares
Sent from my iPad
On Feb 10, 2012, at 5:55 PM, "Smith, Brad" <BSmith at law.capital.edu> wrote:
> I just don’t think voters are so easily duped. Most voters pay no attention to the sources of messages, and seem to do pretty well. Heck, for all I know, you’re not even Rick Hasen. Maybe some student has seized your office while you’re teaching class (OK, trite and flip. J. Guilty as charged. )
>
>
>
> Again, though, as I’ve just noted in another post, if you think more disclosure is needed, that’s fine – it’s not really relevant to the context of my comments about foreign expenditures that had you wondering. You want to make sure that the source is adequately disclosed, by your standards, and that’s fair, and we can debate how much disclosure is “adequate” or “necessary,” but that’s merely dressing on the side to my comments yesterday at CPAC that you first inquired about – the context of my comment that I’m not particularly alarmed at the idea of foreign spending in U.S. elections. Assuming adequate disclosure, do you disagree on the question of foreign contributions? If you do disagree, do you think that is some appalling or off-the-charts view that marks me as a kook? Heck, I’m not even opposed to letting permanent residents vote. Long ago in my career I was even an immigration lawyer. I like foreigners – I think that they have much to offer, even to our understanding of political issues and whom we ought to elect to office.
>
>
>
> Bradley A. Smith
>
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
>
> Designated Professor of Law
>
> Capital University Law School
>
> 303 East Broad Street
>
> Columbus, OH 43215
>
> (614) 236-6317
>
> bsmith at law.capital.edu
>
> http://www.law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.asp
>
>
>
> From: Rick Hasen [mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu]
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:46 PM
> To: Smith, Brad
> Cc: law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: Re: Xenophobia in campaign finance
>
>
>
> I don't understand your point B. First, you said the message from a foreign enemy is likely to be unappealing. When I pointed out to you that the foreign enemy could well decide to fund a more appealing message (consider if North Korea would like to get Obama reelected and it contributes heavily to a 501c4 supporting Priorities USA, or get Obama defeated and contributes heavily to Crossroads GPS), you say that voters would be "smart enough" to figure it out. How so?
>
>
> On 2/10/2012 9:40 AM, Smith, Brad wrote:
>
> a) Not true assuming people are dumb and reporters don’t do their jobs, and voters will wonder about undisclosed info;
>
> b) Wrong, assuming voters are reasonably smart – that is to say, smart enough to operate and preserve a democratic republic.
>
>
>
> The lack of confidence placed in the electorate advocates of speech regulation sometimes astounds me.
>
>
>
> Bradley A. Smith
>
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
>
> Designated Professor of Law
>
> Capital University Law School
>
> 303 East Broad Street
>
> Columbus, OH 43215
>
> (614) 236-6317
>
> bsmith at law.capital.edu
>
> http://www.law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.asp
>
>
>
> From: Rick Hasen [mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu]
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:35 PM
> To: Smith, Brad
> Cc: law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: Re: Xenophobia in campaign finance
>
>
>
> 1) Not true http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/secret-money-is-funding-more-election-ads/2012/02/03/gIQAfTxEuQ_story.html
> 2) A savvy foreign enemy that wants to push the election of a particular candidate (or try to swing control of the House or Senate toward one party or another) would not be dumb enough to run ads in line with the enemy's actual ideology. Instead, it would wrap itself in Americans for American Values and run ads likely to sway the electorate.
>
>
> On 2/10/2012 9:30 AM, Smith, Brad wrote:
>
> 1) There is adequate disclosure.
>
> 2) The messages would not be terribly appealing.
>
>
>
> Bradley A. Smith
>
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
>
> Designated Professor of Law
>
> Capital University Law School
>
> 303 East Broad Street
>
> Columbus, OH 43215
>
> (614) 236-6317
>
> bsmith at law.capital.edu
>
> http://www.law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.asp
>
>
>
> From: Rick Hasen [mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu]
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 12:18 PM
> To: Smith, Brad
> Cc: law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: Re: Xenophobia in campaign finance
>
>
>
> How would voters see right through "messages by America's enemies" if the messages are funded through methods (such as 501c4 organizations) which obscure the identity of the messenger? Doesn't this presuppose there is adequate disclosure in the campaign finance regime?
>
>
>
> On 2/10/2012 8:58 AM, Smith, Brad wrote:
>
> From Rick’s morning report:
>
>
>
> “Important AP report: “Money pouring into the U.S. presidential election from new super political action committees and nonprofit campaign groups appears so far to be strictly American in origin, donated by U.S. companies, unions and millionaires. But it’s easier than ever to conceal the source of money and the identities of contributors, making conditions ripe for illegal donations from foreigners, overseas companies or governments attempting to help a favored candidate for the White House.”
>
>
>
> This report makes me want to know more about the context of this Brad Smith quote. https://twitter.com/#%21/mjbeckel/status/167750200146923521”
>
>
>
> The context was I mentioned that I wasn’t overly concerned if the (I believe these are the examples I used) the Colombian-American Chamber of Commerce wanted to run ads supporting candidates who backed the Colombian free trade pact, or British Citizens wanted to run ads; and that I wasn’t terribly concerned that messages by America’s enemies would have much impact in an election, trusting voters to see through that.
>
>
>
> I then when on to say that I thought that Blumen was properly decided.
>
>
>
> That’s the context.
>
>
>
> I like the fact that the AP thinks that idle speculation is newsworthy. I also would hope some reformers are more than a little embarrassed by this whole xenophobic line of attack of political speech.
>
>
>
> Bradley A. Smith
>
> Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
>
> Designated Professor of Law
>
> Capital University Law School
>
> 303 East Broad Street
>
> Columbus, OH 43215
>
> (614) 236-6317
>
> bsmith at law.capital.edu
>
> http://www.law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.asp
>
>
>
> From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
> Sent: Friday, February 10, 2012 11:12 AM
> To: law-election at UCI.edu
> Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 2/10/12
>
>
>
> Adelson Turning Off Spigot to Newt
>
> Posted on February 10, 2012 7:58 am by Rick Hasen
>
> Bloomberg reports. Guess he’s not this year’s Stewart Mott.
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off
>
> “Judge refuses to halt new voter ID law, but trial date to Be Set”
>
> Posted on February 10, 2012 7:56 am by Rick Hasen
>
> Wisconsin State Journal:“A Dane County judge on Wednesday refused to immediately halt Wisconsin’s new voter ID law, but left the door open for two Milwaukee groups to prove their case at a trial before him….’The fact that this burden will be imposed appears not to be in dispute, but the impact of that burden certainly is disputed,’ Flanagan wrote. ‘Indeed whether or not that burden is of impermissible constitutional scope is likely the determinative issue in this litigation.’”
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in election administration, voter id | Comments Off
>
> “Vos says redistricting talking points were prepared for him”
>
> Posted on February 10, 2012 7:52 am by Rick Hasen
>
> Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel: “Rep. Robin Vos acknowledged Wednesday that talking points were created for him last year that told Republicans to ignore public comments on new election maps.”
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in redistricting | Comments Off
>
> “Super PACs v. Social Media”
>
> Posted on February 10, 2012 7:49 am by Rick Hasen
>
> Maria Teresa Kumar has written this Politico oped.“Come November, we may see a new kind of generational divide emerge in the electorate. Massive media campaigns driven by hundreds of millions of super PAC dollars may indeed overwhelm older ‘offline’ voters — who still get their news from television and newspapers. But even the most heavily funded “old school” communications strategies won’t pass muster with younger, ambidextrous news consumers. These new online voters can watch, digest, fact-check and continue the conversation about what they hear and what they believe with trusted sources and friends across their social networks.”
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in campaign finance, social media and social protests | Comments Off
>
> “Foreign donations a risk in US presidential race”
>
> Posted on February 10, 2012 7:45 am by Rick Hasen
>
> Important AP report: “Money pouring into the U.S. presidential election from new super political action committees and nonprofit campaign groups appears so far to be strictly American in origin, donated by U.S. companies, unions and millionaires. But it’s easier than ever to conceal the source of money and the identities of contributors, making conditions ripe for illegal donations from foreigners, overseas companies or governments attempting to help a favored candidate for the White House.”
>
> This report makes me want to know more about the context of this Brad Smith quote.
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off
>
> “House Democrats Return to Campaign Finance Tack”
>
> Posted on February 10, 2012 7:41 am by Rick Hasen
>
> Roll Call reports.
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off
>
> “U.S. Chamber of Commerce begins multi-million dollar ad campaign in congressional races”
>
> Posted on February 9, 2012 8:15 pm by Rick Hasen
>
> WaPo reports.
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off
>
> “van Hollen Introduces New DISCLOSE Act Focused on Donor Transparency, Super PACs”
>
> Posted on February 9, 2012 8:13 pm by Rick Hasen
>
> Bloomberg BNA: “[Fred Wertheimer] told Bloomberg BNA in a telephone interview that the new version of the bill has been stripped of controversial provisions that impeded progress of the previous DISCLOSE Act, such as a special exemption from disclosure for large membership groups, like the National Rifle Association, and special provisions for unions. Wertheimer said reformers are looking forward to debate over a stripped-down measure that focuses solely on disclosure and treats all organizations across the political spectrum equally. ‘It comes down to a public fight over disclosure versus secrecy,’he said, adding that lawmakers would be hard pressed to defend a stance allowing secret donations to any political groups.”
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off
>
> “Some Saner Voices on ‘Super PACs’”
>
> Posted on February 9, 2012 8:10 pm by Rick Hasen
>
> NYT editorializes.
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in campaign finance | Comments Off
>
> New CRS Report
>
> Posted on February 9, 2012 8:02 pm by Rick Hasen
>
> Presidential nominating process: Current issues (Jan. 27)
>
> <image001.png>
>
> Posted in political parties, primaries | Comments Off
>
> “Rep. Bachus faces insider-trading investigation”
>
> Posted on February 9, 2012 7:59 pm by Rick Hasen
>
> AP: “The Office of Congressional Ethics is investigating the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee over possible violations of insider-trading laws, according to individuals
>
> _______________________________________________
> Law-election mailing list
> Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
> http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120210/1425f7a3/attachment.html>
View list directory