[EL] McCutcheon transcript -- Definition of Audacity

[Larry Levine]

The original hole was created by the contribution limit. It just took time
for the spenders to catch on fully. Contribution limits are the parents of
independent expenditures. The evidence: the history of what has happened in
California state elections and Los Angeles city elections. 
Larry 

-----Original Message-----
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Kelner,
Robert
Sent: Tuesday, October 08, 2013 7:58 PM
To: Rick Hasen
Cc: law-election at UCI.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] McCutcheon transcript -- Definition of Audacity

It's a chicken or the egg thing, really. For the pro-regulation crowd, the
"hole" was created by Citizens United. For the rest of us, the hole was
created by McCain-Feingold, which embedded in FECA a dramatic advantage for
outside soft money groups over the political parties.

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 8, 2013, at 8:08 PM, "Rick Hasen"
<rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:

I should add that this is the whole bootstrapping argument of the
anti-regulation crowd.  Make a hole in the law, and then argue that with the
hole, no further regulation makes any sense.

On 10/8/13 5:05 PM, Marty Lederman wrote:
Please let me know if I'm misreading this, but doesn't Justice Scalia,
joined by Justice Kennedy, spend page after page chiding the SG that the
contribution limits can't possibly serve an anti-corruption interest because
they'll simply cause wealthy individuals to funnel their dollars into
independent expenditures (and PAC expenditures), for which officeholders
will be even more grateful, thereby increasing the risk and degree of
corruption?

Finally, after exhibiting admirable patience, SG Verrilli said:  "Well,
Justice Scalia, I'm not here to debate the question of whether the Court's
jurisprudence is correct with respect to the risks of corruption from
independent expenditures."  And then when Justice Kennedy expressed
dissatisfaction with that answer, Justice Kagan quipped:  "I suppose that if
this Court is having second thoughts about its rulings that independent
expenditures are not corrupting, we could change that part of the law."

I don't know how it played in the courtroom . . . but on the page, it sure
comes off as the ultimate in chutzpah.


On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 1:34 PM, Rick Hasen
<rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>> wrote:
Read the Transcript in McCutcheon Oral Argument at Supreme
Court<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55810>
Posted on October 8, 2013 10:33 am<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=55810> by
Rick Hasen<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here<http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/12-536_
21o2.pdf>.

<ATT00001.png><http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionl
awblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D55810&title=Read%20the%20Transcript%20in%20McCutcheon%20
Oral%20Argument%20at%20Supreme%20Court&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

--
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<tel:949.824.3072> - office
949.824.0495<tel:949.824.0495> - fax
rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/<http://www.law.uci.edu/facu
lty/full-time/hasen/>
http://electionlawblog.org

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.u
ci.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<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org

_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu<mailto:Law-election at department-lists.u
ci.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