[EL] McDonnell Case Shows Virginia is Not Above Corruption

[Sean Parnell]

The commentary by Meredith McGehee begins with the following paragraph:

 

"For many years, opponents of restrictions on the role of money in politics
have held out the state of Virginia to legitimize their opposition to
campaign finance reform.  A state with few restrictions on money in
campaigns, not much disclosure, and few ethics laws, Virginia has been
heralded by reform opponents as showing what politics at the national level
could look like if the federal campaign finance laws were repealed.  The
picture they painted was of patrician politicians above it all,
incorruptible by plebian concerns of money, legislating for the Commonwealth
on purely ideological grounds."

 

I would be very interested in finding out which "opponents of restrictions
on the role of money in politics" have ever characterized Virginia politics
this way. I recall myself and several others noticing that Virginia's (and
Utah's as well) First Amendment-friendly campaign finance system didn't seem
to have made the state any worse off compared to other states, and that in
some governance measures (Pew's rankings of effective governance, for
example) both Virginia and Utah seemed to be doing quite well. That is a far
cry from how Ms. McGehee characterizes our views on Virginia's campaign
finance laws.

 

I can tell you that at CCP, we were well aware that corruption existed in
Virginia. Here, for example, is a policy briefing we did in 2009 comparing
public corruption prosecutions with contribution limits:
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/doclib/20090122_issueanalysis5.pdf The more
observant will see that Virginia is grouped in the "medium corruption"
states category - and rather towards the high end of the medium group. An
updated version of this released in 2013 shows Virginia moving up (or down,
take your pick) to the 'high corruption' category, albeit at the low-end of
that range:
http://www.campaignfreedom.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/2013-08-01_Issue-A
nalysis-5_Do-Lower-Contribution-Limits-Decrease-Public-Corruption1.pdf. Hard
to believe we viewed a state as filled with nothing but "patrician
politicians above it all, incorruptible by plebian concerns of money,
legislating for the Commonwealth on purely ideological grounds" while
simultaneously slotting the state into first the 'medium corruption' and
then the 'high corruption' categories in our research.

 

Somewhere out there I suppose there may be the First Amendment
advocate/campaign finance regulation skeptic who touts Virginia as having a
pure and clean form of politics, untainted by corruption. But I have not ran
across such a person before, perhaps because I don't spend much time at the
unicorn stables. 

 

Best,

 

Sean Parnell

President

Impact Policy Management, LLC

6411 Caleb Court

Alexandria, VA  22315

571-289-1374 (c)

sean at impactpolicymanagement.com

 

Posted in  <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10> campaign finance,
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29> Supreme Court


 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64238> "McDonnell Case Shows Virginia is Not
Above Corruption"


Posted on  <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=64238> August 12, 2014 11:58 am by
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3> Rick Hasen

 
<http://www.clcblog.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=571:mcd
onnell-case-shows-virginia-is-not-above-corruption> Meredith McGehee blogs.

 
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%
3Fp%3D64238&title=%E2%80%9CMcDonnell%20Case%20Shows%20Virginia%20is%20Not%20
Above%20Corruption%E2%80%9D&description=> Share

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140813/a54810d4/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140813/a54810d4/attachment.png>