[EL] Vincent Gray scandal and Citizens United

[David Segal]

One question I keep asking as the DC mayoral scandal and the concomitant outrage unfold: Is there any substantial respect in which the "shadow campaign," as per existing public info about it, couldn't have essentially undertaken the same tasks it's said to have engaged in (sounds like it printed up a bunch of leaflets and direct mail, mostly) had the conspirators been just the slightest increment more sophisticated?  Seems like Harris, who just plead out, could have just better understood how to operate in a Citizens United world:  Couldn't she simply have resigned from Gray's effort -- in order reduce the appearance of coordination -- and carried out the bulk of the activities she's accused of having undertaken, with the same dollars from the same source, and met every standard that the authorities seem to expect of federal post-CU independent expenditure efforts?
Some details here for those who are unaware:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/10/eugenia-clarke-harris-guilty_n_1663839.html?utm_hp_ref=dc

According to Harris' plea agreement, her co-conspirator funneled $653,000 in illicit funds through her public relations firm that she then spent on campaign materials, consultants, supplies and other expenses. The money came in between late July and Sept. 14, 2010, the day of the primary.

The prosecutors said this in an effort to stir up moral outrage -- but it would obviously apply equally to a law-abiding post-CU operation:
"On the outside, the shadow campaign looked like any other. What made this shadow campaign sinister was how it was paid for," Machen said. "D.C. voters had no idea who was influencing them at the ballot box."

-David 		 	   		  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120725/2bc52dc1/attachment.html>