[EL] The apocalypse
JBoppjr at aol.com
JBoppjr at aol.com
Fri Sep 19 15:55:55 PDT 2014
Interesting:
and its use explodes in the summer of 2012.
That suggests that the secret meeting of "reform" groups was in the summer
of 2012 when they all got together and agreed to use the term. They
probably polled and focused grouped it with all their Pew money.
Good detective work, Brad.
And I bet none of the "reform" groups' spokesmen will answer my questions
about what "dark money" is. It is like "soft money" - it is anything that
we say is bad and we want to outlaw.
And it is interesting that they decided to use this phrase, not 'soft
money," which they used to use for this money often times. Jim Bopp
In a message dated 9/19/2014 1:40:05 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
BSmith at law.capital.edu writes:
"the secret meeting of 'reform groups' when the phrase was invented..."
A Westlaw News search finds not a single use of the term applying to
political spending from 1980 through November of 2010, although it was
frequently used in connection with the banking scandals of 2008. The first
appearance of the term to describe political speech that shows up on Westlaw is in
an unattributed (dark?) USA Today editorial on Nov. 3, 2010. The phrase
appears 5 more times in stories in November, 2010, then not again until a
January 1, 2011, story in Mother Jones, and then 1 more January story. Then it
appears in fewer than a half-dozen stories until July 11, 2011, when Pro
Publica, the Soros-funded effort, uses the term. Again, a trickle of stories,
until Mother Jones goes with it again on Jan. 1, 2012. MSNBC's Rachel
Maddow picks it up January 4, 2012, and uses it again on her show the next day.
MSNBC continues to use the term regularly in a variety of its programming,
but especially Maddow's show, and its use explodes in the summer of 2012.
What's the point of all this? Well, one point is that I'm sitting in a
tiny motel lobby in Bluefield, West Virginia waiting for my car to be repaired
and I'm kinda bored, but that's not important here. The more relevant point
is that the phrase "dark money" is essentially a phrase promoted by
ideologically driven editorialists, as an intentional effort to gain a rhetorical
upper-hand. Straight news journalists and academics really shouldn't
validate its use, which is not enlightening, but intended to obfuscate and
engender emotional response.
Bradley A. Smith
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
303 E. Broad St.
Columbus, OH 43215
614.236.6317
http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
____________________________________
From: law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu
[law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu] on behalf of JBoppjr at aol.com [JBoppjr at aol.com]
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2014 12:37 PM
To: tyler at rethinkmedia.org; IShapiro at cato.org
Cc: law-election at uci.edu
Subject: Re: [EL] The apocalypse
Thanks for the partial explanation of what is "dark money," but I would
appreciate it if someone would givie those of us, who were not invited to the
secret meeting of "reform" groups when this phrase was invented, a more
complete explanation.
Does "dark money" included federal IEs and ECs - where donors are required
to be reported under proper circumstances? Does it include Super PACs or
other 527s who report all their donors, but some of the donors are
corporate? Or does it only included issue advocacy by c4, and c6s? Or is there
something else? Jim Bopp
In a message dated 9/19/2014 2:14:04 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
tyler at rethinkmedia.org writes:
Ilya, I know you know all of this, but dark money generally refers to
undisclosed by donor not by expenditure, though some groups that do not
disclose donors also avoid disclosing expenditures by running issue ads that are
not reported to FEC. It's true a small handful of journalists are finding
creative ways to uncover dark money expenditures (eg FCC data) and sometimes
dark money donors (eg IRS and Department of Labor data) but its hard to say
this patchwork system that is only accessible to the very few who know how
to navigate it is anything close to the transparency voters want and
deserve.
Tyler Creighton | _tyler at rethinkmedia.org_ (mailto:tyler at rethinkmedia.org)
| Media Associate
_ReThink Media_ (http://rethinkmedia.org/) | (202) 449-6960 office |
(925) 548-2189 mobile
_ at ReThinkDemocrcy_ (https://twitter.com/rethinkdemocrcy) |
_ at ReThink_Media_ (https://twitter.com/rethink_media) | _ at TylerCreighton_
(http://www.twitter.com/tylercreighton)
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 8:45 PM, Ilya Shapiro <_IShapiro at cato.org_
(mailto:IShapiro at cato.org) > wrote:
If we know how much various groups spend, how is any of this money "dark"?
(Regardless of whether you think it's too much -- whatever "too much"
political speech means.)
Clearly the goal isn't to "disclose" but to chill/restrict, because
government knows better than civil society who should speak, how much, and on
what subjects.
Quel horreur indeed!
Ilya Shapiro
Senior Fellow in Constitutional Studies
Cato Institute
1000 Mass. Ave. NW
Washington, DC 20001
Tel. _202-218-4600_ (tel:202-218-4600)
Cel. _202-577-1134_ (tel:202-577-1134)
_www.cato.org/people/shapiro.html_
(http://www.cato.org/people/shapiro.html)
_twitter.com/ishapiro_ (http://twitter.com/ishapiro)
On Sep 18, 2014, at 8:35 PM, "Tyler Creighton" <_tyler at rethinkmedia.org_
(mailto:tyler at rethinkmedia.org) > wrote:
As Robert Maguire at the Center for Responsive Politics is keen to point
out, the vast majority of dark money is spent in a handful of competitive
races, and therefore, the informative comparison is dark money to total
spending in these particular races, not dark money to all election spending in
the cycle. In 2012, dark money made up around 5% of total cycle spending but
was closer to _20% in the most competitive Senate races_
(http://www.commoncause.org/states/massachusetts/issues/money-in-politics/plea-for-a-pledge/ove
rview.html) (except Massachusetts where the People's Pledge largely kept
dark money out). By Election Day the percentages this year in AK, AR, LA,
NC, etc. will likely be similar meaning dark money will play a big role in
determining control of the Senate even if their spending is only 4% of
spending across all races.
On its own, the Koch's network of dark money groups is responsible for
funding _one out of every 10 TV ads in all Senate races_
(http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/09/04/15459/gop-s-senate-hopes-energized-koch-network-ad-blitz
) . And on the left the dark money group _Patriot Majority USA accounts
for_
(http://www.publicintegrity.org/2014/09/03/15436/can-dark-money-group-help-democrats-keep-senate) about one out of every nine ads aired in the
Arkansas Senate race, one of every eight in Louisiana and one of every 13 in
North Carolina. Add it all up and yes you do get horror.
Tyler Creighton | _tyler at rethinkmedia.org_ (mailto:tyler at rethinkmedia.org)
| Media Associate
_ReThink Media_ (http://rethinkmedia.org/) | _(202) 449-6960_
(tel:(202)%20449-6960) office | _(925) 548-2189_ (tel:(925)%20548-2189) mobile
_ at ReThinkDemocrcy_ (https://twitter.com/rethinkdemocrcy) |
_ at ReThink_Media_ (https://twitter.com/rethink_media) | _ at TylerCreighton_
(http://www.twitter.com/tylercreighton)
On Thu, Sep 18, 2014 at 6:45 PM, Smith, Brad <_BSmith at law.capital.edu_
(mailto:BSmith at law.capital.edu) > wrote:
_“Five Signs the Dark-Money Apocalypse Is Upon Us”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65617)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 7:18 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65617) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Andy Kroll _
(http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/dark-money-2014-elections-house-senate) for Mother Jones:
A milestone passed in late August: According to the _Center for Responsive
Politics_
(http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/08/dark-money-hits-50-million-most-still-to-come/) , dark-money groups—nonprofits created under the
_501(c)(4)_
(http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Other-Non-Profits/Social-Welfare-Organizations) and _(c)(6)_
(http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Other-Non-Profits/Business-Leagues) sections of the US tax code—had
by then surpassed $50 million on elections.
That is about 3.7% of political money this cycle, through September 9. Oh,
the horror!
Bradley A. Smith
Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault
Professor of Law
Capital University Law School
303 E. Broad St.
Columbus, OH 43215
_614.236.6317_ (tel:614.236.6317)
http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx
____________________________________
From: _law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_
(mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu)
[_law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu_ (mailto:law-election-bounces at department-lists.uci.edu) ] on behalf
of Rick Hasen [_rhasen at law.uci.edu_ (mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu) ]
Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2014 6:11 PM
To: _law-election at UCI.edu_ (mailto:law-election at UCI.edu)
Subject: [EL] KSSEN breaking news/much more news
_Breaking: In #KSSEN, Court Rules Taylor Off the Ballot: Analysis_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65645)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 2:43 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65645) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
You can read the opinion _here_
(http://www.kscourts.org/Cases-and-Opinions/opinions/SupCt/2014/20140918/112431.pdf) . Here are my thoughts:
1. This is a unanimous, per curiam (unsigned) opinion from the Court
holding that Democrat Chad Taylor’s name will not be on the ballot in the
Kansas Senate race. This has political implications, as it will likely cause
more Democrats to vote for independent Greg Orman instead of incumbent
Republican Pat Roberts. It puts the seat, and perhaps the Senate, up for grabs.
But there’s a wrinkle. There is still possible Court action now to force
Democrats to name a new candidate to replace Taylor on the ballot.
2. The Court took the narrowest path to reach this decision. Despite
_many arguments_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65498) offered _by the
partie_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65459) s, the court took a very narrow
textual approach. It found that Taylor’s letter complied with the literal
requirement of the statute, because he said he was withdrawing “pursuant to”
the relevant section. The court concluded he “incorporated by reference”
the standard that he was incapable of serving.
3. In ruling this way, the court avoided a _messy factual dispute _
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65309) over whether Taylor was promised by
election officials that his letter was sufficient. The court also sidestepped
some uncertain legislative history as well as uncertain application of the
doctrine of substantial compliance. It was about as simple and
straightforward a way to decide the case as one could imagine. But…
4. If the court was going to issue such a simple, straightforward
unanimous ruling, why did it take so long? No doubt more was going on behind the
scenes than this simple ruling. We probably will never know what was going
on in judicial chambers. A cynic suggested to me the court delayed so much
so there would be no time to litigate over whether Democrats have to name
a replacement on the ballot.
5. The big unanswered question is what happens to the other statute which
appears to require Democrats to replace a withdrawn candidate on the
ballot. The court totally sidesteps the issue, noting that “Nor do we need to
act on Kobach’s allegation that a ruling for Taylor would require the Kansas
Democratic Party State Committee to name his replacement nominee per K.S.A.
25-3905. The Kansas Democratic Party is not a party to this original
action, and this court does not issue advisory opinions.”
6. This leaves the ball in Kobach’s court. He can sue the Democrats to
try to force them to name someone. But how could he sue and have Democrats
hold a convention within the day before ballots are to be printed. It will
be hard for Kobach to say the printing can wait. In this way we have the
ideal situation for the Democrats, what I’ve termed the “_Reverse
Torricelli:_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65319) ” Democrats get to have the
candidate they want removed from the ballot without having to name a replacement.
It is sure to infuriate Republicans.
7. This whole mess could have been avoided if Taylor would have done a
better job with his letter, or if Kobach did not push the issue—and the
evidence that his office had accepted non-complying letters before was damning
to his case. The Court noted that Kobach submitted those letters after the
deadline for filings, but seemed to praise him for doing it out of an “
ethical obligation” to the court. In other words, if he just sat on letters his
office just found which showed the inconsistent treatment of withdrawal
letters in the past, it would have been deceptive to the court.
8. So what happens next depends upon Kobach’s next move. He has said he
would sue Democrats to get them to name a replacement, but given the time
frame now, and the fact that it may not be in Republicans’ political
interests to let this fester any more, this may be the end. [Update: Byran Lowry
_reports_ (https://twitter.com/BryanLowry3/status/512723360870981632) :
"Kobach says Dem chair has been informed that she has 8 days to select a
replacement candidate. _#ksleg_ (https://twitter.com/hashtag/ksleg?src=hash)
_#KSSen_ (https://twitter.com/hashtag/KSSen?src=hash) _#kseln_
(https://twitter.com/hashtag/kseln?src=hash) ." It is not clear how the 8 days fits into
the existing ballot printing timeframe.] [Second update: Kobach is
_moving the mailing to 8/27_
(https://twitter.com/BryanLowry3/status/512722314765406209) . What does this say about what he represented to court about
deadlines? Wow wow wow.]
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65645&title=Breaking:%20In%20#KSSEN,%20Court%20Rules%20
Taylor%20Off%20the%20Ballot:%20Analysis&description=)
Posted in _Uncategorized_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1)
_On 7th Cir WI Voter ID: “Down to the Haywire in the Badger State”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65643)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 2:35 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65643) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Jon Sherman_
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jon-sherman/down-to-the-haywire-in-th_b_5845630.html) :
The court, however, was completely mistaken when it wrote that Wisconsin’
s voter ID law is “materially identical” to the Indiana law upheld by the
Supreme Court in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board. This is wrong in
four ways.
First, Indiana’s ID law only applies to in-person voting, while Wisconsin’
s applies to in-person and absentee ballots. In November 2012, 664,597
Wisconsin voters (21.57%) cast absentee ballots. Alabama is the only other
state that requires photo ID from absentee voters; even Texas’s draconian
voter ID law does not.
Second, Indiana accepts any photo ID that contains a name, bears an
expiration date, and was issued by the U.S. or Indiana, while Wisconsin only
accepts a Wisconsin driver’s license or ID card, military ID, U.S. Passport,
certificate of naturalization which is no more than 2 years old, tribal ID,
and certain student ID cards.
Third, Indiana permits indigent voters to sign an affidavit instead of
presenting an ID.
Finally, Wisconsin only accepts student IDs if they contain a signature,
an issuance date, and an expiration date no later than two years after the
election. While the University of Wisconsin System has taken steps to have
their schools issue separate voting IDs to students, it is unclear whether
other private and technical colleges have taken similar steps. In Indiana,
a student ID only needs to have an expiration date.
Not only is Indiana’s ID law more lenient than Wisconsin’s, but the
Supreme Court’s decision in Crawford did not address the same legal issues.
There was no Voting Rights Act claim in Crawford. Moreover, the Crawford
plaintiffs’ counsel had assembled almost zero evidence of actual harm to voters,
whereas the plaintiffs here have assembled an extensive record documenting
ID-less voters who cannot vote or will experience great difficulty in
obtaining this license to vote. What the record does not contain is any
evidence that the DMV’s untested birth verification procedure will work. The
plaintiffs needed to show copious evidence to win their injunction, but the
state secured this win on the court’s blind faith.
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65643&title=On%207th%20Cir%20WI%20Voter%20ID:%20“
Down%20to%20the%20Haywire%20in%20the%20Badger%20State”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter id_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=9) , _Voting Rights Act_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15)
_#KSSEN Decision to Be Released Around 5 PM Kansas Time_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65641)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 2:04 pm_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65641) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
Stay tuned….
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65641&title=#KSSEN%20Decision%20to%20Be%20Released%20Ar
ound%205%20PM%20Kansas%20Time&description=)
Posted in _Uncategorized_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1)
_“Voter Registration Modernization Bill Would Improve Outdated Election
System”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65638)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 11:08 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65638) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Press release_
(http://www.brennancenter.org/press-release/voter-registration-modernization-bill-would-improve-outdated-election-system) : “U.S. Sen.
Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) today introduced the Voter Registration
Modernization Act, which would provide national standards for secure and
accessible online registration and help bring America’s election system into the
21st century.”
Did I ever mention I went to law school with the Senator? I don’t think I
’ve seen her since law school graduation (1991).
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65638&title=“
Voter%20Registration%20Modernization%20Bill%20Would%20Improve%20Outdated%20Election%20System”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter
registration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37)
_Brennan Center Files 4th Cir. Amicus Brief in NC Voting Case_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65636)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 11:06 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65636) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Here_
(http://www.brennancenter.org/sites/default/files/legal-work/North_Carolina_Amicus_Brief_091714.pdf) .
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65636&title=Brennan%20Center%20Files%204th%20Cir.%20Ami
cus%20Brief%20in%20NC%20Voting%20Case&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)
_“Insider Traders in Congress May Soon Be Revealed by the Bipartisan ‘
Political Intelligence Transparency Act’”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65634)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 10:37 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65634) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Craig Holman statement_
(http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=4287) at Public Citizen.
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65634&title=“
Insider%20Traders%20in%20Congress%20May%20Soon%20Be%20Revealed%20by%20the%20Bipartisan%20‘
Political%20Intelligence%20Transparency%20Act’”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)
_“Why Does Georgia Keep Going After Black Voters?”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65632)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 10:24 am_ (
http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65632) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Spencer Woodman writes _
(http://www.vice.com/read/why-does-the-state-of-georgia-keep-going-after-black-voters-918) for VICE.
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65632&title=“
Why%20Does%20Georgia%20Keep%20Going%20After%20Black%20Voters?”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60)
_Controversial CO SOS Gessler Complains of Partisanship, Gridlock in
Election Administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65630)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 10:16 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65630) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_This Electionline Weekly_
(http://www.electionline.org/index.php/electionline-weekly) interview is sure to get some attention:
What was the most difficult time/issue you have faced (elections wise of
course) as secretary?
As our states’ chief election officials, secretaries of state enforce
election laws. We’re tasked with ensuring only eligible voters cast ballots,
and the eligibility requirements are few: citizens, 18 or older, and
Colorado residents. Instead of relying on a loose honor system, we decided to
verify citizenship, just like we check against the other two requirements. But
the gridlock, partisanship, and hysteria surrounding this issue is
disappointing. Just getting the federal government to comply with federal law and
provide us with the information we needed was a big challenge. We got the
runaround from various levels of the federal bureaucracy for over a year
before we finally worked out an agreement to verify citizenship data. This
helped pave the way for other states to also verify data. But it amazes me
that certain partisans continue to oppose enforcement of basic,
uncontroversial laws that protect election integrity.
It also disappointing that people frequently throw common sense out the
door when it comes to election integrity. During the 2012 election cycle, a
reporter from Mexico City interviewed me. When he disapprovingly focused on
election integrity issues like photo identification and citizenship, I
told him that I merely wanted to implement something like the Mexican system
in Colorado. Mexico has strong integrity protections, which have helped
improve the fairness and integrity of its elections. But he thought that
Hispanic voters were fundamentally different than Mexican voters, and that while
photo identification was fine for Mexico, it was somehow terrible in the
United States. I strongly disagreed — fair and honest voting systems are a
universal aspiration, regardless of race, ethnicity, or country of origin.
Protecting the sanctity of our voter rolls shouldn’t be a wedge issue. In
fact, what we’ve seen is that when voters trust the system and trust the
results, turnout and participation improves. That should be our goal. If
voters don’t trust the system, it makes little difference how easy it is to
get a ballot.
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65630&title=Controversial%20CO%20SOS%20Gessler%20Compla
ins%20of%20Partisanship,%20Gridlock%20in%20Election%20Administration&descrip
tion=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60)
_“Less than 1 percent of voter registration forms turned in by a Georgia
group accused of fraud are actually fraudulent”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65627)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 8:53 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65627) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_WaPo_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/09/18/less-than-1-percent-of-voter-registration-forms-turned-in-by-a-georgia-group-accused-o
f-fraud-are-actually-fraudulent/) :
Less than 1 percent of voter registration forms turned in by a Georgia
group accused of voter fraud are actually fraudulent, the Georgia’s secretary
of state’s office announced Wednesday.
There were 25 confirmed forgeries found in voter registration documents,
Jared Thomas, spokesman for Secretary of State Brian Kemp (R), told The
Washington Post. That’s out of more than 85,000 voter registration forms
turned in by the New Georgia Project and Third Sector Development.
“We believe we’ve identified 25 felonies, and we take that very
seriously,” Thomas said.
State Rep. Stacey Abrams (D) who heads New Georgia Project said the group
flagged potential forms that were not completed, but was required by law
to turn in every form someone worked on. “We don’t get to decide if
something is good or bad,” she _told The Post last week_
(http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/09/10/georgias-gop-secretary-of-state-investigates
-allegations-of-voter-fraud-by-democrat-led-group/) .
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65627&title=“
Less%20than%201%20percent%20of%20voter%20registration%20forms%20turned%20in%20by%20a%20Georgia%20group%20accused%20of%
20fraud%20are%20actually%20fraudulent”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18) ,
_The Voting Wars_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60) , _voter
registration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37)
_“Overtime: Five Reasons Senate Control Might Not Be Decided on Election
Day”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65625)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 8:50 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65625) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Oh boy_
(http://www.centerforpolitics.org/crystalball/articles/overtime-five-reasons-senate-control-might-not-be-decided-on-election-day/) .
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65625&title=“
Overtime:%20Five%20Reasons%20Senate%20Control%20Might%20Not%20Be%20Decided%20on%20Election%20Day”&description=)
Posted in _campaigns_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59) , _recounts_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=50)
_“McDonnell Appeal Begs Question: What Is Corruption?”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65623)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 8:48 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65623) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Important piece_
(http://blogs.rollcall.com/beltway-insiders/gov-mcdonnell-appeal-begs-question-what-is-corruption/) from Eliza Newlin Carney.
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65623&title=“
McDonnell%20Appeal%20Begs%20Question:%20What%20Is%20Corruption?”&description=)
Posted in _bribery_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54) , _campaign
finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10) , _chicanery_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12)
_“35 Groups Write to House Leadership for Debate/Vote on Democracy for All
Amendment”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65621)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 8:13 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65621) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Read_
(http://www.commoncause.org/policy-and-litigation/letters-to-government-officials/National-091714-letter-to-house-leaders.pdf) .
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65621&title=“
35%20Groups%20Write%20to%20House%20Leadership%20for%20Debate/Vote%20on%20Democracy%20for%20All%20Amendment”
&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)
_“With mayor’s race looming, Philly ethics board takes on big spenders”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65619)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 7:34 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65619) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_News_
(http://www.newsworks.org/index.php/local/item/72883-mayors-race-looms-ethics-board-takes-on-big-spenders?linktype=hp_topstory)
_Draft regulations_
(http://www.phila.gov/ethicsboard/PDF/BOERegNo1_CampaignFinance_ProposedAmendmentPostedRecordsDept_7.17.14.pdf)
_Adam Bonin comment_
(http://www.scribd.com/doc/240169517/Comments-to-Proposed-Regulation-No-1-9-17-2014) s.
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65619&title=“With%20mayor’
s%20race%20looming,%20Philly%20ethics%20board%20takes%20on%20big%20spenders”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)
_“Five Signs the Dark-Money Apocalypse Is Upon Us”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65617)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 7:18 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65617) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Andy Kroll _
(http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/09/dark-money-2014-elections-house-senate) for Mother Jones:
A milestone passed in late August: According to the _Center for Responsive
Politics_
(http://www.opensecrets.org/news/2014/08/dark-money-hits-50-million-most-still-to-come/) , dark-money groups—nonprofits created under the
_501(c)(4)_
(http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Other-Non-Profits/Social-Welfare-Organizations) and _(c)(6)_
(http://www.irs.gov/Charities-&-Non-Profits/Other-Non-Profits/Business-Leagues) sections of the US tax code—had
by then surpassed $50 million on elections. These groups, unlike
political action committees and candidates’ campaigns, do not have to disclose
their donors. So some of the key players looking to sway election results
remain in the shadows. This was a new record and seven times the amount of dark
money spent by the same point on House and Senate elections in 2010. And
this week, dark-money spending for the 2014 cycle reached $63 million—just
shy of the $69 million in dark money spent during the entire 2008
presidential election.
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65617&title=“
Five%20Signs%20the%20Dark-Money%20Apocalypse%20Is%20Upon%20Us”&description=)
Posted in _campaign finance_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10)
_“5 States Put Voting Reform to the Voters”_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65615)
Posted on _September 18, 2014 7:14 am_
(http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65615) by _Rick Hasen_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3)
_Governing reports_
(http://www.governing.com/topics/elections/gov-election-reform-ballot-measures.html) .
_<share_save_171_16.png>_
(https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65615&title=“
5%20States%20Put%20Voting%20Reform%20to%20the%20Voters”&description=)
Posted in _election administration_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18)
_“Native Voting Rights”_ (http://electionlawblog.org/?p=65613)
...
[Message clipped]
_______________________________________________
Law-election mailing list
Law-election at department-lists.uci.edu
http://department-lists.uci.edu/mailman/listinfo/law-election
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20140919/db48e2fa/attachment.html>
View list directory