[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/14/14
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Jan 13 20:25:23 PST 2014
Campaign Finance Related Items in Omnibus Spending Bill
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57925>
Posted on January 13, 2014 8:23 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57925>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
According to "The Fix:
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/01/13/the-winners-and-losers-of-the-new-spending-bill/>"
*GOVERNMENT CONTRACTORS*
The legislation prohibits any funding to require that contractors
bidding for federal contracts disclose campaign contributions. The
Obama administration has openly flirted with issuing executive
orders that would require contractors to provide campaign
disclosures....
*THE IRS*
The scandal-ridden tax-writing agency comes in for special scrutiny
this year. There's no funding "to target groups for regulatory
scrutiny based on their ideological beliefs or to target citizens
for exercising their First Amendment rights."...
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57925&title=Campaign%20Finance%20Related%20Items%20in%20Omnibus%20Spending%20Bill&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law
and election law <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>
NY Times Covers Election Problems in Texas and Honduras...But Not
NYC <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57922>
Posted on January 13, 2014 6:21 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57922>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
So odd <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57651>.
The coverage
<http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/31/nyregion/bloomberg-in-final-mayoral-days-appoints-new-head-of-campaign-finance-board.html>
so far amounts to a single sentence: "On Monday, it released a report
highlighting the shortcomings of the city's Board of Elections."
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57922&title=NY%20Times%20Covers%20Election%20Problems%20in%20Texas%20and%20Honduras%E2%80%A6But%20Not%20NYC&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"OpenSecrets.org Releases New, Improved Lobbying Data"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57920>
Posted on January 13, 2014 6:14 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57920>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
As usual the Center for Responsive Politics makes the most
<http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/01/opensecretsorg-releases-new-improved-lobbying-data.html>
of available data.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57920&title=%E2%80%9COpenSecrets.org%20Releases%20New%2C%20Improved%20Lobbying%20Data%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in lobbying <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=28>
"Counsel Rests: Why did Mitch McConnell---not the Senate's
lawyer---participate in Monday's recess appointments case at the
Supreme Court?" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57918>
Posted on January 13, 2014 5:59 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57918>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Neal Devins writes
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2014/01/the_senate_s_lawyer_doesn_t_participate_in_important_litigation_against.html>
for /Slate./
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57918&title=%E2%80%9CCounsel%20Rests%3A%20Why%20did%20Mitch%20McConnell%E2%80%94not%20the%20Senate%E2%80%99s%20lawyer%E2%80%94participate%20in%20Monday%E2%80%99s%20recess%20appointments%20case%20at%20the%20Supreme%20Court%3F%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in legislation and legislatures <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>
Wisconsin Supreme Court finally weighs in on redistricting (by
punting) <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57910>
Posted on January 13, 2014 5:46 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57910>by Justin Levitt
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=4>
In July of 2011, the Wisconsin legislature passed new district lines, in
a hurry. (Though activity had not been scheduled
<https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/2011/related/rules/joint> to resume
before September, the legislature reconvened in extraordinary session on
July 19 <http://legis.wisconsin.gov/spotlight/spotl491.htm>, and passed
both state and federal maps by July 20.)
The Wisconsin Supreme Court wasn't in such a rush. The new maps were
challenged in federal court, and that lawsuit effectively drew its own
challenge in state court, with a petition seeking a declaration that the
maps were valid, and that they would apply to recall elections in the
spring of 2012. (The filings, catalogued on my site
<http://redistricting.lls.edu/states-WI.php#litigation>, amount to a
forum battle, with the parties variously trying to get a first ruling
out of a Waukesha trial court, the Wisconsin Supreme Court, and a
three-judge federal court. Fascinating for procedural junkies --- and
I'm one --- but fairly impenetrable otherwise.)
The Wisconsin Supreme Court gathered in all the state filings, which
presented some intriguing statutory interpretation and jurisdictional
questions, at the minimum. And it sat. The case was fully briefed by
December 13, 2011. (The federal case was resolved by April 2012.)
*Today*
<http://redistricting.lls.edu/files/WI%20clinard%20XX%2020140113%20dismiss.pdf>,
the SCOW (SCOWI?) dismissed its cases as moot.
Passive virtues, indeed.
For those keeping score, there are still 31 cases left
<http://redistricting.lls.edu/cases.php>, of the 206 lawsuits concerning
state or federal redistricting this cycle. So far.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57910&title=Wisconsin%20Supreme%20Court%20finally%20weighs%20in%20on%20redistricting%20%28by%20punting%29&description=>
Posted in redistricting <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=6>, statutory
interpretation <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=21>
New Investigation of DOJ Civil Rights Division Coming?
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57914>
Posted on January 13, 2014 5:27 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57914>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ryan Reilly: <https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/422899143258816512>
"Omnibus requires #*DOJ* <https://twitter.com/search?q=%23DOJ&src=hash>
IG to spend $1 million on independent review of Civil Rights Division.
http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20140113/CPRT-113-HPRT-RU00-h3547-hamdt2samdt_xml.pdf ...
<http://t.co/FKeApegZy6>"
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57914&title=New%20Investigation%20of%20DOJ%20Civil%20Rights%20Division%20Coming%3F&description=>
Posted in Department of Justice <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=26>,
Voting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
Quote of the Day: IRS Mess Edition
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57911>
Posted on January 13, 2014 5:25 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57911>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
"As far as I can tell, nobody has actually done an investigation. This
has been a big, bureaucratic, former-Soviet-Union-type investigation,
which means that there was no investigation....This is a deplorable
abuse of the public trust, but I am not surprised."
--Cleta Mitchell, quoted in WSJ's Criminal Charges Not Expected in IRS
Probe
<http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303819704579318983271821584>,
which begins:
The Federal Bureau of Investigation doesn't plan to file criminal
charges over the Internal Revenue Service's heightened scrutiny of
conservative groups, according to law-enforcement officials, a move
that likely will only intensify debate over the politically charged
scandal.
The officials said investigators didn't find the kind of political
bias or "enemy hunting" that would amount to a violation of criminal
law. Instead, what emerged during the probe was evidence of a
mismanaged bureaucracy enforcing rules about tax-exemption
applications it didn't understand, according to the law-enforcement
officials.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57911&title=Quote%20of%20the%20Day%3A%20IRS%20Mess%20Edition&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
"US Supreme Court won't hear Nevada ballot case"
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57908>
Posted on January 13, 2014 5:18 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57908>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
AP
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/nevada-to-keep-none-of-the-above-ballot-option/2014/01/13/1b82032a-7c83-11e3-97d3-b9925ce2c57b_story.html>:
"Nevada's unique 'none of the above' voting option for statewide races
will remain an election spoiler for the foreseeable future after the
U.S. Supreme Court declined Monday to consider an appeal by national
Republicans."
Here's <http://electionlawblog.org/?s=%22none+of+the+above%22&x=0&y=0> a
collection of this blog's earlier coverage of this case, including the
Judge Reinhardt smackdown of the district court judge and his caustic
response.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57908&title=%E2%80%9CUS%20Supreme%20Court%20won%E2%80%99t%20hear%20Nevada%20ballot%20case%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in Uncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
More Doonesbury on the Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57904>
Posted on January 13, 2014 7:56 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57904>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Here. <http://doonesbury.slate.com/strip/archive/2014/1/12>
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57904&title=More%20Doonesbury%20on%20the%20Voting%20Wars&description=>
Posted in The Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>
"True the Vote Strikes Favorable Settlement with Ohio Secretary of
State to Purge Voter Rolls" <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57902>
Posted on January 13, 2014 7:55 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57902>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
See this press release
<http://www.truethevote.org/news/true-the-vote-strikes-favorable-settlement-with-ohio-secretary-of-state-to-purge-voter-rolls>.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57902&title=%E2%80%9CTrue%20the%20Vote%20Strikes%20Favorable%20Settlement%20with%20Ohio%20Secretary%20of%20State%20to%20Purge%20Voter%20Rolls%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted in election administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,
NVRA (motor voter) <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=33>, The Voting Wars
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter registration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>
Thoughts About the Supreme Court's Recently Granted False Speech
Case <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57900>
Posted on January 13, 2014 7:53 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57900>by Rick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I've now had a chance to read the petition
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/SBADriehaus13TermCERT.pdf>,
opposition
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/FINAL-Brief-in-Opp-SBA_COAST-for-printing-11-27-2013.pdf>,
andreply
<http://sblog.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/SBA-Cert-Reply.pdf>
in Susan B. Anthony List v. Driehaus
<http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/susan-b-anthony-list-v-driehaus/>.
I believe this case is about ripeness, not the merits of Ohio's false
speech law.
I expect the Court to reverse the Sixth Circuit, perhaps unanimously,
and I think that's the right result. Getting a probable cause
determination against someone at the Ohio Elections Commission is a real
injury which has serious political consequences.
I expect that the Supreme Court will not reach the merits of the
constitutionality of Ohio's false speech law, either on its face or as
applied to the Susan B. Anthony group. That would be left to the lower
courts with a possible return trip to the Supreme Court in the future.
My earlier post on the case is here
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57863>, and my substantive take on false
campaign speech laws after /US v. Alvarez/ inA Constitutional Right to
Lie in Campaigns and Elections?
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2151618>
[/This post has been updated./]
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57900&title=Thoughts%20About%20the%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Recently%20Granted%20False%20Speech%20Case&description=>
Posted in campaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Subsidizing Democracy on C-Span 2 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57897>
Posted on January 12, 2014 10:56 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57897>by Spencer Overton
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=17>
As Rick mentioned in an earlier post
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=57801>, *this morning at 9:30 am ET
Professor Michael Miller is talking on his public financing book
"Subsidizing Democracy
<http://www.newamerica.org/events/2014/subsidizing_democracy>"* at the
New America Foundation, and I'll comment along with Michael Malbin and
Matt Heinz (Mark Schmitt is the moderator).
The book is an important empirical contribution (Miller's data shows
that public financing results in participating candidates spending less
time fundraising, voters being more likely to vote in down-ballot races,
and Republican candidates being less likely to accept public financing
and more likely to face a challenger).
The book, however, focuses largely on systems that provide public
financing grants to candidates that were hampered by the U.S. Supreme
Court's invalidation of the trigger provision in/Arizona Free
Enterprise/, and has only a few pages on systems that provide a multiple
match of donations (e.g., NYC's 6-to-1 match which makes a $100
contribution worth $700 to the candidate). For me, increasing
incentives for candidates to engage citizens (broaden participation) is
more important than limiting spending or increasing the pool of new
candidates. I also think public financing should be accompanied by
"insurance policies" in the form of Small Donor PACs and increased
coordinated spending limits by parties when using money from small
donors (or the first $200 of any contribution), so that if future
politicians balance budgets by cutting public financing, revenue-neutral
laws remain that incentivize small donor engagement.
A summary of the panel is here
<http://www.newamerica.org/events/2014/subsidizing_democracy>, *C-Span 2
is covering it live (watch here
<http://www.c-span.org/Live-Video/C-SPAN2/>)*, and my Minnesota Law
Review article on public financing ("Matching Political Contributions")
is here
<http://professorsofcolor.wordpress.com/2012/11/12/matching-political-contributions/>.
Share
<http://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D57897&title=Subsidizing%20Democracy%20on%20C-Span%202&description=>
Posted in campaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
--
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://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140113/bddd44d5/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: share_save_171_16.png
Type: image/png
Size: 1504 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140113/bddd44d5/attachment.png>
View list directory