[EL] "FEC Deadlock Derail Matters"

Sun Feb 17 15:07:36 PST 2013

 I just updated the figures on FEC split votes. Besides the numbers that so frustrate Brad -- of which I need not debate, the numbers speak for themselves -- are the numbers of radically declining actions. The FEC is not just immobilized between those commissioners who believe in the law and those who don't (the deadlock numbers), it is actually deadlocking on far, far fewer actions under consideration.

So, while split votes on enforcement matters has increased eight-fold, the number of actions under consideration has plummeted ten-fold. 

The dysfunction within the commission clearly is demoralizing the staff of the agency as well. Though I have the highest regard for the staff, it is hard to work well when the commissioners will not.

Updated chart is attached.

Craig Holman, Ph.D.
Government Affairs Lobbyist
Public Citizen
215 Pennsylvania Avenue SE
Washington, D.C. 20003
T-(202) 454-5182
C-(202) 905-7413
F-(202) 547-7392
Holman at aol.com

-----Original Message-----
From: Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu>
To: law-election at UCI.edu <law-election at uci.edu>
Sent: Sat, Feb 16, 2013 5:19 pm
Subject: Re: [EL] "FEC Deadlock Derail Matters"

This is the type of reporting that is so frustrating. 

First, if a faculty, for example, has a rule requiring a two-thirds vote for tenure, we wouldn't normally say that a 19-13 vote "derailed" tenure. Indeed, if you had a simple majority rule, we wouldn't usually say that a 16-16 vote was a "deadlock." We would say the person was denied tenure. If the House votes 216-216 on a measure, we don't say it "deadlocked," we say the measure lost.

Similarly, when the FEC votes 3-3 not to find reason to believe, it has not found reason to believe that the law was broken, the predicate for an investigation under the statute.

Second, the article not only tells us that the Commission "deadlocked," but that it "deadlocked along party lines." Factually accurate, true. But pretty much everyone who follows the Commission agrees that partisanship is not the reason for 3-3 votes. It would be sort of like writing, "President Obama today nominated one Republican and one Democrat to seats on the FEC...," and leaving it at that. Such an act would not really be a demonstration of bipartisanship, but if it were not explained later why he nominated a Republican, it is simply misleading. 

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

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of Rick Hasen [rhasen at law.uci.edu]
Sent: Saturday, February 16, 2013 4:05 PM
To: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 2/16/13

“FEC Deadlocks Derail Matters Involving Crossroads GPS, Family-Member Super PAC”
Posted onFebruary 15, 2013 5:50 pm by Rick Hasen

Bloomberg BNA:

The Federal Election Commission dismissed two cases involving allegations of illegal coordination between congressional candidates and outside spending groups after the commissioners deadlocked along party lines regarding whether the cases should be investigated, the FEC announced Feb. 15.
One case involved Crossroads GPS, among the most prominent Republican-leaning nonprofit groups involved in recent campaigns. Designated Matter Under Review (MUR) 6368, the case involved allegations that the group’s founder, Republican strategist Karl Rove, illegally coordinated efforts with then-Rep. Roy Blunt’s (R-Mo.) successful 2010 campaign for U.S. Senate.
The other case (MUR 6611) involved a super PAC funded by the mother of Laura Ruderman, an unsuccessful Democratic candidate for the U.S. House in 2012. The case was the FEC’s first consideration of a single-candidate PAC financed by the candidate’s family, according a written statement from three of the commissioners.

Posted incampaign finance,federal election commission |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

-- 
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

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130217/165f1af7/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ATT00001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130217/165f1af7/attachment.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: FEC deadlock press statement Jan 2013 cb.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 539136 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20130217/165f1af7/attachment.doc>