[EL] "Ready for a surprise? Money DOES equal access in Washington"

[Rick Hasen]

There is another view, which is that the Court was wrong in writing that 
in Citizens United, and the equation of access with corruption in 
McConnell (and other cases was correct).
Things may change once the Supreme Court changes. That is, the 
definition of "corruption' depends upon what 5 Justices of the Supreme 
Court says it means.


On 3/11/2014 11:19 AM, Joe La Rue wrote:
> But access DOES NOT equal real or apparent corruption, which as we all 
> know is the only constitutionally cognizable interest in limiting 
> contributions or expenditures.  Indeed, "The fact that speakers may 
> have influence over or access to elected officials does not mean that 
> these officials are corrupt." /Citizens United v. FEC/, 130 S.Ct. 876, 
> 910 (2010).
> Whether legislators /should /give greater access to those who make 
> contributions or expenditures is a fair question.  Perhaps we should 
> organize a petition to require the House and Senate to change their 
> rules to require their members to meet with anyone and everyone who 
> requests a meeting.  Of course, that would likely keep the members of 
> the legislature from legislating, which would keep them from spending 
> money we don't have on projects we don't need.
> Now that you mention it, where do I sign that petition?
> Joe
> ___________________
> *Joseph E. La Rue*
> cell: 480.272.2715
> email: joseph.e.larue at gmail.com <mailto:joseph.e.larue at gmail.com>
>
>
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE:  This e-mail message, including any 
> attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may 
> contain confidential and privileged information or otherwise be 
> protected by law. Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or 
> distribution is prohibited. If you have received this message in 
> error, please immediately notify the sender and permanently delete the 
> message.
> PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEY-CLIENT COMMUNICATION/ATTORNEY 
> WORK PRODUCT.
>
> IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: Any tax advice contained in this 
> communication was not written and is not intended to be used for the 
> purpose of (i) avoiding penalties imposed by the Internal Revenue Code 
> or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending any transaction or 
> matter addressed herein.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
hhttp://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/20140311/f703cfc0/attachment.html>