[EL] more news 4/16/15
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Thu Apr 16 12:29:57 PDT 2015
Hillary Clinton’s Bad Campaign Finance Ideas; She’s right that money
in politics is a problem. But suggesting a constitutional amendment
is foolish.” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71787>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 12:03 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71787>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I have writtenthis piece
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/04/hillary_clinton_and_campaign_finance_the_democratic_front_runner_s_suggestion.html?wp_login_redirect=0>for
/Slate. /It begins:
People are deservedly angry about the unprecedented flow of money
into our elections. On Wednesday a postal worker literally risked
his lifeto land a gyrocopter
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/04/16/wonkbook-gyrocopter-pilot-lands-at-capitol-to-protest-money-in-politics/>near
the U.S. Capitol to protest the Supreme Court’s decision in/Citizens
United/
<http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/jurisprudence/2011/10/citizens_united_how_justice_kennedy_has_paved_the_way_for_the_re.html>.
The group 99Rise keeps risking jail time by sneaking into the
Supreme Court andsurreptitiously filming
<http://thehill.com/policy/technology/237713-protesters-release-video-of-supreme-court-outburst>protesters’
outbursts in open court against decisions that have construed the
First Amendment to prohibit most limits on money in politics.
So it is understandable that Democratic presidential candidate
Hillary Clinton is trying to harness some of that progressive energy
by announcing that campaign finance reform is one of the “four big
fights
<http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/238808-clinton-calls-for-constitutional-amendment-on-campaign>”
that her campaign will emphasize. But Clinton’s early call for a
constitutional amendment to fix campaign finance problems is
counterproductive and will only make things worse
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71787&title=%E2%80%9CHillary%20Clinton%E2%80%99s%20Bad%20Campaign%20Finance%20Ideas%3B%20She%E2%80%99s%20right%20that%20money%20in%20politics%20is%20a%20problem.%20But%20suggesting%20a%20constitutional%20amendment%20is%20foolish.%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Freedom of Expression Scholars Conference 3 at Yale
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71783>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 7:11 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71783>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
I’m delighted to be on a plenary panel about campaign finance and the
First Amendment with Tabatha Abu El-Haj and moderated by Jack Balkin at
Yale’s 3rdFreedom of Expression Scholars conference
<http://isp.yale.edu/event/freedom-expression-scholars-conference-3/fesc-3-agenda> on
May 2 and 3. The conference isco-sponsored
<http://electionlawblog.org/du/event/freedom-expression-scholars-conference-3>by
the Floyd Abrams Institute at Yale–and I’ll be presenting the two
chapters of my upcomingPlutocrats United
<http://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453>book
which deal with First Amendment critics of reform, including Floyd.
Should be fun.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71783&title=Freedom%20of%20Expression%20Scholars%20Conference%203%20at%20Yale&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Big Money From Super PACs Is Eroding the Power of Parties”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71780>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 7:03 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71780>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Nate Cohn writes
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/16/upshot/big-money-from-super-pacs-is-eroding-the-power-of-parties.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&abt=0002&abg=1>for
NYT’s The Upshot.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71780&title=%E2%80%9CBig%20Money%20From%20Super%20PACs%20Is%20Eroding%20the%20Power%20of%20Parties%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
More on Support for Literacy Tests Etc.
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71778>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:55 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71778>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
In this post <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71749>, I asked if anyone
besides Ann Coulter on the national political stage has voiced support
for literacy tests in recent years. Thanks to those who passed on more
information.
The Brad Blog reports <http://www.bradblog.com/?p=7687>that Tom Tancredo
did in 2010. (More fromZack Roth
<http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/tancredo-obama-elected-because-we-do-not-have-a-civics-literacy-test> (from
when he was at TPM)).
FOX and Friends <http://bradblog.com/?p=10973>also seems literacy
test-curious.
Steve Benenreports
<http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/floridas-yoho-connects-voting-rights>that
Representative Ted Yoho also made noises supporting property requirements.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71778&title=More%20on%20Support%20for%20Literacy%20Tests%20Etc.&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
National Democracy Slam 2015 <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71775>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:46 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71775>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
This looks fun.
<http://www.fairvote.org/assets/National-Democracy-Slam-Agenda-2015.pdf> It
will be webcast as well.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71775&title=National%20Democracy%20Slam%202015&description=>
Posted inUncategorized <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>
“2014 Eagleton Poll California RCV Survey Results”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71773>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:45 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71773>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
FairVote
<http://www.fairvote.org/research-and-analysis/local-elections-2/ranked-choice-voting-civility-project/2014-survey-results/>:
As part of a broader project funded by the Democracy Fund, the
Eagleton Poll at Rutgers University has conducted two polls—one in
2013 and another in 2014—that explore the impact of RCV on city
elections in the United States. Each poll surveyed a random sample
of more than 2,400 likely voters, the great majority of whom had
voted in their local election that year. The surveys were conducted
in English and Spanish and on cell and landline telephones.
The latest report explores the socioeconomic and demographic
dynamics of support for and experience with RCV in the California
Bay Area in November 2014. Likely voters in 11 California cities
were polled: four cities holding RCV elections (Berkeley, Oakland,
San Francisco and San Leandro), and 7 control cities with
demographics and social structures comparable to a surveyed RCV
city. Key findings are summarized below.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71773&title=%E2%80%9C2014%20Eagleton%20Poll%20California%20RCV%20Survey%20Results%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inalternative voting systems <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=63>
“Partisan Balance Requirements in the Age of New Formalism”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71771>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:44 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71771>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Ron Krotoszynski, Jonjerica Hodge, and Wesley Wintermyer have postedthis
draft<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2589534>on SSRN
(forthcoming, /Notre Dame Law Review/). Here is the abstract:
This Article considers the constitutional status of mandatory
partisan balance requirements for presidential appointments to
independent federal agencies. Since the 1880s, Congress routinely
has included partisan balance requirements, along with fixed terms
of office and “good cause” limitations on the President’s removal
power, as standard design elements in its template for independent
federal agencies. Until recently, both federal courts and most legal
scholars have assumed the constitutionality of such restrictions on
the President’s appointment power — and with good reason, given the
ubiquity of partisan balance requirements and the executive branch’s
historical acquiescence to them. However, the Supreme Court’s
decision in Free Enterprise Fund threatens to upend this
well-settled consensus; the decision squarely holds that Congress
may not unduly attenuate the President’s power to supervise and
control executive branch entities — including independent agencies —
without violating the separation of powers doctrine.
In this Article, we posit that partisan balance requirements, at
least when used in conjunction with fixed terms of office and good
cause removal limitations, create a problem of at least equal
magnitude to the problem identified in Free Enterprise Fund (namely,
unduly insulating executive officers with policymaking authority via
a two-tiered good cause removal limitation). Under the logic of Free
Enterprise Fund, requiring the President to appoint political
opponents to principal offices within the executive branch, and then
prohibiting the President from removing such appointees except for
good cause, unduly compromises the President’s ability to supervise
and control these agencies. Although Humphrey’s Executor settled the
constitutional status of good cause limits on the President’s
removal power for principal officers serving on independent federal
agencies, Free Enterprise Fund’s broadly formalist reading of the
Vesting and Faithful Execution Clauses strongly suggests that the
combination of a partisan balance requirement with a good cause
removal limit constitutes a bridge too far in the age of new formalism.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71771&title=%E2%80%9CPartisan%20Balance%20Requirements%20in%20the%20Age%20of%20New%20Formalism%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted infederal election commission <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=24>
“Mr. Noble in His Gyrocopter” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71769>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71769>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Bauer blogs
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/04/mr-noble-gyrocopter/>:
Long in the field of campaign finance, well versed in its triumphs
and tribulations, Larry Noble of the Campaign Legal Centerobjects
strongly
<http://www.campaignlegalcenter.org/news/blog/magical-thinking-about-reform>to
thesuggestions for disclosure reform
<http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2015/04/keep-shining-the-light-on-dark-money-116901.html#ixzz3XD1kRDAT>I
co-authored with Professor Samuel Issacharoff. It’s all a magic
trick, he argues, that accomplishes the reverse of its stated
intention: it moves contributions into the dark, raises the risk
corruption and disregards the lessons of Watergate. The public is
not “gullible”: it won’t buy it.
It is difficult not to imagine that Mr. Noble is engaged in theater
of his own, something likethe aerial feat performed yesterday
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/florida-mailman-lands-a-gyrocopter-on-capitol-lawn-hoping-to-a-send-message/2015/04/15/3be11140-e39a-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html>by
the mailman in a gyrocopter who touched down on the Capitol grounds
with a similarly passionate appeal for campaign finance reform.
This gentleman, undoubtedly sincere but less clearly prudent,
entitled his project “Kitty Hawk”, after the Wright Brothers’ fabled
flight in North Carolina in 1903. Larry, if he were maneuvering a
craft, might have named it “Watergate,” and he would have refreshed
the message by 70 years, with only another four decades to go to
cross over into the current century and to the present time.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71769&title=%E2%80%9CMr.%20Noble%20in%20His%20Gyrocopter%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Another Clinton Now Vows to Fix Political Finance System”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71767>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:31 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71767>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Nick Confessore
<http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/17/us/politics/another-clinton-now-vows-to-fix-political-finance-system.html?_r=0>reports
for the NYT.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71767&title=%E2%80%9CAnother%20Clinton%20Now%20Vows%20to%20Fix%20Political%20Finance%20System%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Montana Republicans And Democrats Unite To Ban Dark Money”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71765>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:30 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71765>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Paul Blumenthal reports
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/04/15/montana-dark-money_n_7074084.html>for
HuffPo.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71765&title=%E2%80%9CMontana%20Republicans%20And%20Democrats%20Unite%20To%20Ban%20Dark%20Money%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Vulnerable Voting Machine Raises Questions About Election Security”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71763>
Posted onApril 16, 2015 6:29 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=71763>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Pam Fessler reports
<http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/04/16/399986331/hacked-touchscreen-voting-machine-raises-questions-about-election-security?utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=morningedition&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150416>for
NPR.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D71763&title=%E2%80%9CVulnerable%20Voting%20Machine%20Raises%20Questions%20About%20Election%20Security%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,voting technology
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>
--
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/20150416/6920c430/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/20150416/6920c430/attachment.png>
View list directory