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

Tue Mar 11 11:58:26 PDT 2014

It seems to be an interesting study, but not terribly convincing or scientific.

To the extent it shows that money buys access, it does not show that only money buys access, or even that money buys access in greater degree than do other factors.  (In fact, reading it more closely, it only even shows that money buys access from Democrats - not to be partisan, just to illustrate the point).  For example, would emails differentiating between "local constituents" and "local constituents who are veterans of military conflict" or "local constituents who are crippled children" have produced a statistically significant result?

Many factors could produce that same statistical result, such as identifying factors like "labor union" or "church group", but that does not equate to "corruption".

Eric Lycan
Steptoe & Johnson PLLC
One Paragon Centre
2525 Harrodsburg Road, Suite 300
Lexington, KY 40504
O: 859-219-8213 F: 304-933-8715 C: 859-621-8888
Eric.Lycan at Steptoe-Johnson.com
www.steptoe-johnson.com<http://www.steptoe-johnson.com/>
@KYcampaignlaw

From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu [mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] On Behalf Of Rick Hasen
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 2:22 PM
To: Joe La Rue; law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] "Ready for a surprise? Money DOES equal access in Washington"

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<mailto: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<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>

hhttp://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/

http://electionlawblog.org

________________________________

Steptoe & Johnson PLLC Note:
This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may be protected by legal privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, be aware that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of this e-mail or any attachment is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify us immediately by returning it to the sender and delete this copy from your system. Also, In accordance with I.R.S. Circular 230, we advise you that any tax advice in this email is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, by any recipient for the avoidance of penalties under federal tax laws. Thank you for your cooperation.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140311/d833d08b/attachment.html>