[EL] Check out N.Y. Lawmakers Charged in Plot to Buy Spot on Mayoral Ball...

Wed Apr 3 09:23:28 PDT 2013

Jim,

I'm really confused.  In your ideal world, would you set the law that you could "legally" "buy" an elected official by making the max level donation?

You keep pointing to Jefferson/Cunningham as evidence for a "deal point" around $100,000.  Presuming that it is true, for at least certain officials who might be predisposed to corruption, what does that tell us?

As the idea is to avoid corruption, we would need a donation level materially below the "deal point".

A second corollary to your analysis would be a presumption that - again, for the subset of folks who have a $100K deal point and are amenable to corruption - is that they are already bought by the unlimited Citizen United-empowered spenders.  Is that your position?

Kevin

Kevin Greenberg
(215) 279-9912

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of JBoppjr at aol.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 11:56 AM
To: lminnite at gmail.com; law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] Check out N.Y. Lawmakers Charged in Plot to Buy Spot on Mayoral Ball...

Yes, I do understand what this case is about and my point remains that bribes in cases like this are helpful in determining what is the going rate, at least among some people, for money exchanged for political favors.  There are obviously differences that need to be understood in applying this analogy.  For instance, if campaign contributions cannot be used personally, then I would think that a candidate would insist on a larger campaign contribution than a personal one, like here. Another difference is that a candidate is the bribor and political party officials are the bribees.  This may or may not effect the going rate.

But the general point remains, looking at what it took here to bribe political party officials to provide a political favor, and at what it took to bribe Congressmen Jefferson ($99,000 in cold hard cash) and Cunningham (minimum $140,000), it is apparent that contribution limits are way below a large contribution that could tempt a candidate to sell his vote.  Jim Bopp

In a message dated 4/3/2013 10:58:56 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, lminnite at gmail.com writes:
Mr. Bopp is completely confused about what this case is about.  It has nothing to do with campaign contribution limits for mayoral candidates.  If New York City had no limits at all for mayoral candidates, if New York City voters or corporations could give millions of dollars to Malcolm Smith or to the Republican Party, it would not have mattered here.  What's at issue are Republican Party ballot access rules and influence-peddling (more plainly put - bribery) to acquire the support of county leaders for yet another registered Democrat to run as their mayoral candidate.

On 4/3/2013 10:04 AM, JBoppjr at aol.com<mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com> wrote:

    You have hit on the other interesting point about this.  NYC contribution limits for Mayor are $4,950 and less for other offices. Each of the bribees demanded much more.  This seems to be further anecdotal evidence that current contribution limits are too low. (See also Congressmen Jefferson and Cunningham)  Jim Bopp

In a message dated 4/3/2013 9:58:22 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, margaret.groarke at manhattan.edu<mailto:margaret.groarke at manhattan.edu> writes:
Au contraire, we New Yorkers just want to make sure that bribing public officials is affordable! The desire to get one's way shouldn't bankrupt a person.

More seriously, the limits we have in NYS are really generous (I would be permitted to donate $41,000 to a gubernatorial candidate in the general election). And these allegations are about donations to parties, about which I don't have the rules handy. But a LOT of things need to change in NY.

On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:01 AM, <JBoppjr at aol.com<mailto:JBoppjr at aol.com>> wrote:
Click here: N.Y. Lawmakers Charged in Plot to Buy Spot on Mayoral Ballot - NYTimes.com<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/03/nyregion/state-senator-and-city-councilman-accused-of-trying-to-rig-mayors-race.html?hp&_r=0>

Thank goodness NYC has contribution limits.  It has sure fixed the corruption problem there.  Jim Bopp

_______________________________________________
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

--
Margaret Groarke
Director, Core Curriculum
Associate Professor, Government
[Image removed by sender.]

Error! Filename not specified.
Riverdale, NY 10471
Phone: 718-862-7943
Fax: 718-862-8044
margaret.groarke at manhattan.edu<mailto:name.name at manhattan.edu>
www.manhattan.edu<http://www.manhattan.edu/>

_______________________________________________

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

_______________________________________________
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/20130403/196daffd/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ~WRD000.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 823 bytes
Desc: ~WRD000.jpg
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130403/196daffd/attachment.jpg>