[EL] John Edwards - ELB News and Commentary 1/13/12
Steve Hoersting
hoersting at gmail.com
Fri Jan 13 12:59:07 PST 2012
*Politico* is a reporting a medical condition of John Edwards that will
delay trial. Let's all hope the former Senator regains his health and
vigor.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71421.html
Steve Hoersting
On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 11:15 AM, Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> wrote:
> “PACs’ Aid Allows Romney’s Rivals to Extend Race”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27908>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 8:13 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27908>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Nick Confessore and Jim Rutenberg have written this piece<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/us/politics/pacs-aid-allows-mitt-romneys-rivals-to-extend-race.html?hp>for the
> *NY Times*.
>
> I think it is important to recognize the limits<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27877>that the Super PAC money will have (and have had) on the presidential race.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27908&title=%E2%80%9CPACs%E2%80%99%20Aid%20Allows%20Romney%E2%80%99s%20Rivals%20to%20Extend%20Race%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Texas GOP files advisory with SCOTUS, says primary cannot be moved”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27906>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 8:11 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27906>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Texas Redistricting <http://txredistricting.org/?e9a5fb10>: “The
> Republican Party of Texas took the unusual step today of sending a
> post-argument letter to the Supreme Court to tell the court in no uncertain
> terms that the date of the party’s state convention could not be moved.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27906&title=%E2%80%9CTexas%20GOP%20files%20advisory%20with%20SCOTUS%2C%20says%20primary%20cannot%20be%20moved%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, Supreme
> Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>, Voting Rights Act<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
> | Comments Off
> “Americans Elect 2012 presidential run: The third-party group has cash,
> but no candidate” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27903>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 8:09 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27903>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Must-read <http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71399.html> *Politico
> *piece by Ken Vogel and Abby Philip. Taagen Goddard<http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/01/13/independent_group_has_money_but_no_candidate.html>:
> Most interesting: While the group talks about defying convention, they’re
> courting the usual moderate suspects.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27903&title=%E2%80%9CAmericans%20Elect%202012%20presidential%20run%3A%20The%20third-party%20group%20has%20cash%2C%20but%20no%20candidate%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in ballot access <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=46> | Comments
> Off
> “The Strategy Behind Political Ads”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27901>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 8:07 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27901>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Ken Goldstein and Elizabeth Wilner have written this *Politico *oped<http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0112/71390.html>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27901&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Strategy%20Behind%20Political%20Ads%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Polls video slammed as a ‘fraud’” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27898>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 8:05 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27898>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> *Union-Leader<http://www.unionleader.com/article/20120113/NEWS15/701139985>:
> *“The New Hampshire League of Women Voters Thursday called on the state
> Attorney General’s Office for a full-scale prosecution of ‘out-of-state con
> artists’ for allegedly falsely claiming to be recently deceased New
> Hampshire residents to obtain their ballots during Tuesday’s presidential
> primary.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27898&title=%E2%80%9CPolls%20video%20slammed%20as%20a%20%E2%80%98fraud%E2%80%99%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in chicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>, election
> administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18> | Comments Off
> What’s Next for President Elect (to Be) Colbert?<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27896>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 8:04 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27896>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> It may not be clear
> <http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/us/politics/stephen-colbert-to-explore-or-pretend-to-run-for-president.html?hp>even
> to Colbert. But if Colbert keeps this going for a while, here are some
> things he could do without running afoul of the FEC’s porous coordination
> rules:
>
> 1. He could fundraise <http://fec.gov/agenda/2011/mtgdoc_1137b.pdf>for
> the Super PAC, so long as he does not ask for more than $5,000.
>
> 2. He could take footage <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=25792> from the
> Super PAC’s ads, and use them in his own ads.
>
> 3. If we are far enough from the election, he might even be able to appear<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=26808>in a Super PACs ads.
>
> In other words, Colbert can explain how he can coordinate without
> illegally coordinating. Theater of the absurd indeed.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27896&title=What%E2%80%99s%20Next%20for%20President%20Elect%20%28to%20Be%29%20Colbert%3F&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,
> campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,
> election law "humor" <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=52> | Comments Off
> A Nice Picture of Sam Issacharoff and Rick Pildes….<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27893>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 7:51 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27893>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> appears in a completely irresponsible post
> <http://biggovernment.com/cjohnson/2012/01/13/media-smears-okeefe-using-obama-election-lawyer/>on
> “Big Government,” smearing the messenger for delivering the news that James
> O’Keefe and his allies may well have violated state and federal anti-voter
> fraud laws.
>
> For the record, Sam Issacharoff is one of the preeminent legal scholars in
> the U.S., not only in election law but also in civil procedure/complex
> litigation. Everyone quoted in the TPM article, including Cato’s John
> Sample, had the same view as Sam. While there is not unanimity in the
> election law community on whether O’Keefe and his allies should be
> prosecuted, I have yet to hear an election law expert say that this doesn’t
> merit at least an investigation.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27893&title=A%20Nice%20Picture%20of%20Sam%20Issacharoff%20and%20Rick%20Pildes%E2%80%A6.&description=>
> Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1> | Comments
> Off
> Do I “Clearly Hate Fun”? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27891>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 7:43 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27891>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> David A. Graham<http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/01/video-of-the-day-stephen-colbert-is-in-it-to-win-it-or-something/251373/>obviously does not read this blog.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27891&title=Do%20I%20%E2%80%9CClearly%20Hate%20Fun%E2%80%9D%3F&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> Who Needs Danielczyk? <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27889>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 7:41 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27889>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Think Progress Justice:Survey: Illegal Corporate Campaign Contributions
> Up 400%<http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/01/12/403738/survey-illegal-corporate-campaign-contributions-up-400/>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27889&title=Who%20Needs%20Danielczyk%3F&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Citizens United or Not — We Aren’t Helpless”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27886>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 7:39 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27886>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Carl Pope blogs<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/carl-pope/citizens-united-or-not-we_b_1200449.html>
> .
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27886&title=%E2%80%9CCitizens%20United%20or%20Not%20%E2%80%94%20We%20Aren%E2%80%99t%20Helpless%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Back to the Robber Barons” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27883>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 7:35 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27883>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> The *NY Times* editorializes<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/13/opinion/back-to-the-robber-barons.html>on the RNC amicus brief in
> *Danielczyk*. Political hay <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27702>.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27883&title=%E2%80%9CBack%20to%20the%20Robber%20Barons%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “The Rap Against Super PACs” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27880>
> Posted on January 13, 2012 7:31 am <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27880>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Jacob Sullum writes<http://reason.com/blog/2012/01/12/the-rap-against-super-pacs>in
> *Reason* and he’s a lot more honest <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27232>about things than the Supreme Court: “As Hasen points out, the Supreme
> Court’s shaky distinction between spending (speech) and campaign
> contributions (not speech) is even shakier now that groups like Winning Our
> Future, Restore Our Future, and Back to the Future (my suggestion for a
> pro-Paul, constitutionalist super PAC) are run by politicians’ former
> staffers and funded by familiar campaign supporters. The super PACs are
> prohibited from ‘coordinating’ with candidates’ campaigns, but politicians
> are still apt to be grateful to the people who help them win elections,
> which is a tendency to keep in mind while evaluating the performance of
> elected officials. *Still, the possibility of corruption does not
> override the First Amendment*.”
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27880&title=%E2%80%9CThe%20Rap%20Against%20Super%20PACs%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Big spending on presidential candidates can have little effect”<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27877>
> Posted on January 12, 2012 5:42 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27877>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> Tim Farnam reports<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/big-spending-on-presidential-candidates-can-have-little-effect/2012/01/10/gIQA7QtduP_story.html>for
> *WaPo*.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27877&title=%E2%80%9CBig%20spending%20on%20presidential%20candidates%20can%20have%20little%20effect%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> | Comments
> Off
> “Colbert for president (again)” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27874>
> Posted on January 12, 2012 5:34 pm <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27874>
> by Rick Hasen <http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
>
> CNN reports<http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2012/01/12/colbert-for-president-again/>that Stephen Colbert said “I’m proud to announce I plan to form an
> exploratory committee to lay the groundwork for my candidacy in the United
> States of South Carolina” and that because of legal problems<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27858>with a candidate controlling a Super PAC, he is turning over control to Jon
> Stewart.
>
> I had wrongly predicted <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=27810> he would
> not want to give up control of the Super PAC and would instead endorse
> Buddy Roemer.
>
> Since it is too late for Colbert to get on the ballot in South Carolina
> and the state prohibits write-in votes, it is not clear what a candidacy
> means here. Nor is it clair what it means to be a candidate “in the United
> States of South Carolina.”
>
> Perhaps after getting no (legal) votes in South Carolina he will suspend
> his candidacy and then retake control of the super PAC.
>
> I’m sure all these machinations will keep Colbert’s lawyers plenty busy,
> and all of us entertained.
> [image: Share]<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D27874&title=%E2%80%9CColbert%20for%20president%20%28again%29%E2%80%9D&description=>
> Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, election
> law "humor" <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=52> | Comments Off
> --
> Rick Hasen
> Chancellor's 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
>
--
Stephen M. Hoersting
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120113/ba953e48/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1520 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120113/ba953e48/attachment.png>
View list directory