[EL] Civic Courage, Indeed

[Robert Wechsler]

One of the things I find missing in this discussion is the concept of 
appearance. The public can never /know/ whether an "independent" 
expenditure group is truly independent of a candidate committee. The 
public can only go by how independent the group appears to be. 
Appearance is the only solid standard the public has.

If an "independent" expenditure group is run by members of a candidate's 
personal circle, then it will not /appear/ independent. And therefore, 
there is an appearance that contributions to the expenditure group are 
no different than contributions to a candidate committee. Such 
contributions, then, may both appear and be corrupting every bit as much 
as contributions to a candidate committee.

Arguing that contributions to an "independent" expenditure group should 
be unlimited cannot be legitimate without an accompanying argument that 
the group must /appear/ independent. Otherwise, from the public's point 
of view (which is what matters) it is effectively an argument that 
contributions to a candidate committee should be unlimited, and this has 
been rejected by the Supreme Court.

Robert Wechsler
Director of Research
City Ethics, Inc.
rwechsler at cityethics.org
203-230-2548
www.cityethics.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20131120/a2d01a01/attachment.html>