[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/15/15

Rick Hasen rhasen at law.uci.edu
Wed Jan 14 21:31:58 PST 2015


    “Kris Kobach proposes bills to return straight-ticket voting, change
    election-withdraw procedure” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69663>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 8:32 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69663>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

News from Kansas 
<http://www.kansas.com/news/politics-government/article6557622.html>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69663&title=%E2%80%9CKris%20Kobach%20proposes%20bills%20to%20return%20straight-ticket%20voting%2C%20change%20election-withdraw%20procedure%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    Vanderbilt Law Review Roundtable on Williams-Yulee Judicial Campaign
    Case Before SCOTUS <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69661>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 8:19 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69661>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

This looks good 
<http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/enbanc/roundtable/roundtable-williams-yulee-v-the-florida-bar/>:

    Our current Roundtable considers/Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar/,
    to be argued before the Supreme Court on January 20, 2015.
    In/Williams-Yulee/, the Court considers whether a rule of judicial
    conduct that bans judicial candidates from directly soliciting
    campaign funds violates the First Amendment. The case has important
    implications, as currently thirty-nine states elect at least some of
    their judges and at least twenty have adopted rules of judicial
    conduct that prohibit candidates for judicial office from personally
    soliciting campaign funds. Beyond an obvious split among both
    federal and state appellate courts,/Williams-Yulee/presents a
    conflict between the scope of protection afforded by the First
    Amendment of political speech and the need for judicial impartiality
    and integrity. Authors Robert O’Neil, Ruthann Robson, Chris Bonneau,
    Shane Redman, David Earley, Matthew Menendez, Stephen Ware, Charles
    Geyh, Burt Neuborne, Michael DeBow, and Brannon Denning tackle these
    questions and more in their contributions.

    The Absent Amicus: “With Friends Like These . . .”
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/The-Absent-Amicus-With-Friends-Like-These.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/The-Absent-Amicus-With-Friends-Like-These.pdf>·
    Robert M. O’Neil · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 1 (2015).

    Public Interest Lawyering & Judicial Politics: Four Cases Worth a
    Second Look in/Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar/
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Public-Interest-Lawyering-Judicial-Politics-Four-Cases-Worth-a-Second-Look-in-Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar1.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Public-Interest-Lawyering-Judicial-Politics-Four-Cases-Worth-a-Second-Look-in-Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar1.pdf>·
    Ruthann Robson · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 15 (2015).

    Much Ado About Nothing: The Irrelevance of/Williams-Yulee v. The
    Florida Bar/on the Conduct of Judicial Elections
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Much-Ado-About-Nothing-The-Irrelevance-of-Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar-on-the-Conduct-of-Judicial-Elections.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Much-Ado-About-Nothing-The-Irrelevance-of-Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar-on-the-Conduct-of-Judicial-Elections.pdf>·
    Chris W. Bonneau & Shane M. Redman · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 31 (2015).

    /Williams-Yulee/and the Inherent Value of Incremental Gains in
    Judicial Impartiality
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Williams-Yulee-and-the-Inherent-Value-of-Incremental-Gains-in-Judicial-Impartiality.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Williams-Yulee-and-the-Inherent-Value-of-Incremental-Gains-in-Judicial-Impartiality.pdf>·
    David W. Earley & Matthew J. Menendez · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 43
    (2015).

    Judicial Elections, Judicial Impartiality and Legitimate Judicial
    Lawmaking:/Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar/
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Judicial-Elections-Judicial-Impartiality-and-Legitimate-Judicial-Lawmaking-Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Judicial-Elections-Judicial-Impartiality-and-Legitimate-Judicial-Lawmaking-Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar.pdf>·
    Stephen J. Ware · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 59 (2015).

    The Jekyll and Hyde of First Amendment Limits on the Regulation of
    Judicial Campaign Speech
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/The-Jekyll-and-Hyde-of-First-Amendment-Limits-on-the-Regulation-of-Judicial-Campaign-Speech1.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/The-Jekyll-and-Hyde-of-First-Amendment-Limits-on-the-Regulation-of-Judicial-Campaign-Speech1.pdf>·
    Charles Gardner Geyh · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 83 (2015).

    What Do Judges Do All Day? In Defense of Florida’s Flat Ban on the
    Personal Solicitation of Campaign Contributions From Attorneys by
    Candidates for Judicial Office
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/What-Do-Judges-Do-All-Day.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/What-Do-Judges-Do-All-Day.pdf>·
    Burt Neuborne · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 99 (2015).

    /Williams-Yulee v. The Florida Bar/, the First Amendment, and the
    Continuing Campaign to Delegitimize Judicial Elections
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar-the-First-Amendment-and-the-Continuing-Campaign-to-Delegitimize-Judicial-Elections.pdf>
    PDF
    <http://www.vanderbiltlawreview.org/content/articles/2015/01/Williams-Yulee-v.-The-Florida-Bar-the-First-Amendment-and-the-Continuing-Campaign-to-Delegitimize-Judicial-Elections.pdf>·
    Michael E. DeBow & Brannon P. Denning · 68 VAND. L. REV. EN BANC 113
    (2015).

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69661&title=Vanderbilt%20Law%20Review%20Roundtable%20on%20Williams-Yulee%20Judicial%20Campaign%20Case%20Before%20SCOTUS&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,judicial elections 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>,Supreme Court 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Conservatives’ wish list for GOP retreat includes citizenship,
    voting bills” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69659>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 8:13 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69659>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Politico 
<http://www.politico.com/story/2015/01/gop-retreat-conservative-wish-list-114261.html?hp=r1_3>:

    The list also includes a bill King introduced in the last Congress
    that would change the rules determining who is considered a U.S.
    citizen, plus legislation from Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas that would
    require a “proof of citizenship” for Americans looking to vote in
    federal elections.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69659&title=%E2%80%9CConservatives%E2%80%99%20wish%20list%20for%20GOP%20retreat%20includes%20citizenship%2C%20voting%20bills%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


    “Husted to seek review of 2014 election”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69657>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 7:47 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69657>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

AP reports 
<http://www.timesreporter.com/article/20150114/NEWS/150119664/10559/LIFESTYLE>from 
Ohio.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69657&title=%E2%80%9CHusted%20to%20seek%20review%20of%202014%20election%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>,The Voting Wars 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>


    “A 2012 phenomenon could be a 2016 norm: Candidates hanging around
    thanks to super PAC spending” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69655>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 3:41 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69655>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo reports. 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2015/01/14/a-2012-phenomenon-could-be-a-2016-norm-candidates-hanging-around-thanks-to-super-pac-spending/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69655&title=%E2%80%9CA%202012%20phenomenon%20could%20be%20a%202016%20norm%3A%20Candidates%20hanging%20around%20thanks%20to%20super%20PAC%20spending%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    Citizens United v FEC after Five Years
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69648>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 2:25 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69648>byRichard Pildes 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>

Next Wednesday, Jan. 21st, is the fifth anniversary of the Supreme 
Court’s decision in/Citizens United. /I’ll be participating in an 
intriguing conference The Center for Competitive Politics is hosting, 
which will kick off with an interview of the General Counsel for 
Citizens United.  The conference will take place at the Cato Institute, 
located at 1000 Massachusetts Ave NW; registration is available at the 
following link, and the Program for the conference is included below.

http://www.campaignfreedom.org/event-citizens-united-v-fec-after-five-years/

*Program:*

9:00 AM

*The Story Behind the Lawsuit*

*Michael Boos*, General Counsel, Citizens United

Interviewer: TBA

9:20 AM

*The Impact on Parties in the age of Citizens United: Are changes needed?*

*Joel Gora*, Professor of Law, Brooklyn Law School

*Neil Reiff*, Founding partner, Sandler Reiff Lamb Rosenstein & 
Birkenstock, P.C.

*Peter J. Wallison*, Arthur F. Burns Fellow, American Enterprise Institute

Interviewer:

*Mike Allen*,* Politico

10:20 AM

*Should liberals support Citizens United?*

*Ira Glasser*, former Executive Director, ACLU

*Gabe Rottman*, legislative counsel, ACLU

*Wendy Kaminer*, Author, lawyer, social critic and contributing editor 
of/The Atlantic/

Interviewer:

*Stuart Taylor, Jr., A*uthor, freelance writer and a Brookings 
Institution nonresident senior fellow

11:20 AM

*Beyond Citizens United: the future of campaign finance jurisprudence*

*Bobby R. Burchfield*, Partner, McDermott Will & Emery LLP

*Richard H. Pildes*, Sudler Family Professor of Constitutional Law, New 
York University School of Law

*Bradley A. Smith*, Chairman and Founder, Center for Competitive 
Politics, Judge John T. Copenhaver Visiting Endowed Chair of Law at the 
West Virginia University, former FEC Chairman

Interviewer:

*Matea Gold*,/The Washington Post/

//

12:15 PM Adjourn

* – Invited, not yet confirmed

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69648&title=Citizens%20United%20v%20FEC%20after%20Five%20Years&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    Covington Issues Advisory Telling Corporations How to Deal with
    Pesky Shareholders’ and Others’ Requests to Disclose Political
    Donations <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69650>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 2:24 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69650>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here 
<http://www.cov.com/files/Publication/01943f36-dfd4-4c4b-8cdb-11766b93f29b/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/7b101d72-01e6-4745-bc0f-1300d9ac4c05/Responding_to_Corporate_Political_Disclosure_Initiatives_A_How_To_%20Guide_for_In_House_Counsel.pdf>.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69650&title=Covington%20Issues%20Advisory%20Telling%20Corporations%20How%20to%20Deal%20with%20Pesky%20Shareholders%E2%80%99%20and%20Others%E2%80%99%20Requests%20to%20Disclose%20Political%20Donations&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “CMD Issues New Report on Latest Assault on Clean Election Laws”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69646>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 1:18 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69646>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here. 
<http://prwatch.org/news/2015/01/12711/cmd-issues-new-report-latest-assault-clean-election-laws>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69646&title=%E2%80%9CCMD%20Issues%20New%20Report%20on%20Latest%20Assault%20on%20Clean%20Election%20Laws%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Center for Competitive Politics Reacts To Public Citizen Report”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69644>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 12:43 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69644>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Here. 
<http://www.campaignfreedom.org/2015/01/14/center-for-competitive-politics-reacts-to-public-citizen-report/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69644&title=%E2%80%9CCenter%20for%20Competitive%20Politics%20Reacts%20To%20Public%20Citizen%20Report%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    The VRAA, as Expected, is Going Nowhere in the New Congress
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69642>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 10:18 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69642>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

MSNBC 
<http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/top-goper-confirms-congress-wont-strengthen-voting-rights-act>:

    A top Republican has all but confirmed that Congress won’t move
    forward with legislation to strengthen the Voting Rights Act (VRA),
    which was badly weakened by the Supreme Court in 2013.

    Rep. Bob Goodlatte, who chairs the House Judiciary committee, said
    Wednesday morning that the landmark civil rights legislation is
    still robust enough to stop racial discrimination in voting.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69642&title=The%20VRAA%2C%20as%20Expected%2C%20is%20Going%20Nowhere%20in%20the%20New%20Congress&description=>
Posted inVoting Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>,VRAA 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=81>


    “Tax credit for $200 in political giving could encourage small
    donors” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69640>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 9:17 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69640>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

David Gans 
<http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-gans-campaign-finance-tax-credit-20150114-story.html>LA 
Times oped:

    The policy landscape is highly polarized, with the two sides talking
    past each other. Rather than simply rehearsing the same stale
    debates, we need to find different approaches. One is to enact a
    federal tax credit to encourage small donors to contribute up to
    $200 to a candidate or political party.

    Such a tax credit would provide every American who files an IRS tax
    return with a chance to make a political contribution to his or her
    candidate or political party. This is an idea first proposed in
    Congress in the 1950s, and it deserves fresh consideration today.

Gans also wrote the issue brief,/“Participation and Campaign Finance: 
The Case for a Federal Tax Credit 
<http://theusconstitution.org/think-tank/issue-brief/participation-and-campaign-finance-case-tax-credit>.”/

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69640&title=%E2%80%9CTax%20credit%20for%20%24200%20in%20political%20giving%20could%20encourage%20small%20donors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Study Shows Big Donors Dominated Competitive 2014 Congressional
    Races” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69638>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 9:15 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69638>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

US Pirg 
<http://www.uspirg.org/news/usp/study-shows-big-donors-dominated-competitive-2014-congressional-races>:

    U.S. PIRG today released a new study, “The Money Chase: Moving from
    Big Money Dominance in the 2014 Midterms to a Small Donor
    Democracy,” at a joint research summit with seven other major
    money in politics organizations. The study, which was written by
    U.S. PIRG and Demos, found that the top two vote-getters in the 25
    most competitive districts in 2014 got 86 percent of their campaign
    cash from individuals giving $200 or more. Only two of the 50
    candidates surveyed raised less than 70 percent of their individual
    contributions from big donors, and seven relied on big donors for
    more than 95 percent of their individual contributions.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69638&title=%E2%80%9CStudy%20Shows%20Big%20Donors%20Dominated%20Competitive%20%202014%20Congressional%20Races%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Groups Have Deep Ties to Campaigns and Parties They Support,
    Discrediting Key Assumption in Supreme Court’s Citizens United
    Decision” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69635>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 7:06 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69635>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release <http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=4371>:

    Single-candidate super PACs represented 45 percent of all super PACs
    that spent at least $100,000 during this election cycle, a newPublic
    Citizen report shows <http://www.citizen.org/superconnected>.

    The report is the latest installment in a series Public Citizen
    began in October 2012 critiquing the assumption by the U.S. Supreme
    Court in its landmark 2010/Citizens United v. Federal Election
    Commission/decision that outside spending groups are by their nature
    independent of candidates and political parties.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69635&title=%E2%80%9CGroups%20Have%20Deep%20Ties%20to%20Campaigns%20and%20Parties%20They%20Support%2C%20Discrediting%20Key%20Assumption%20in%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Citizens%20United%20Decision%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “Election Spending 2014: Outside Spending in Senate Races Since
    ‘Citizens United'” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69633>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 7:03 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69633>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

New Brennan Center report 
<http://www.brennancenter.org/publication/election-spending-2014-outside-spending-senate-races-citizens-united>:

    *Key findings include:*

    /Outside spending by a tiny number of mega-rich donors has played an
    increasingly important role in each federal election since Citizens
    United./

      * Outside spending on Senate elections has*more than doubled since
        2010, increasing to $486 million in 2014*. (As with any analysis
        based on FEC numbers, the totals we report underestimate
        spending, since they do not include amounts spent on sham issue
        ads that are not required to be reported.)
      * Outside groups spent more than candidates in 2014’s closest races.
          o Across the 10 competitive races that we have candidate
            spending data for,*outside groups accounted for the greatest
            share of spending, or 47 percent*. Candidates lagged behind
            with 41 percent, and parties accounted for 12 percent.
          o Candidates were outspent by outside groups and parties
            together in eight of the 10 races. In four of the contests
            (Alaska, Colorado, Iowa, and North Carolina), candidates
            made only a third or less of the total expenditures.
          o Nonparty groups alone spent more than the candidates in
            seven of the 10 states.
      * Super PACs are funded by an exclusive few.
          o Of the 10 highest-spending super PACs in the most
            competitive Senate races in 2014,*all but two got less than
            one percent of their individual contributions from small
            donors of $200 or less*. Average contributions from donors
            of more than $200 were in the five- and six-figure range.
          o Across all federal elections since/Citizens United/was
            decided in 2010, there has been more than $1 billion in
            super PAC spending. Just 195 individuals and their spouses
            gave almost 60 percent of that money — more than $600 million.

    /The wealthy have used single-candidate groups to support candidates
    far in excess of federal contribution limits./

      * In the 11 competitive Senate races in 2014, 16
        candidate-specific groups each spent more than $1 million in
        Senate elections, twice as many as in the last election. Five of
        these groups spent more than $3 million; three of them beat the
        previous cycle’s record high of $5.9 million.
      * Single-candidate groups depend heavily on donors who have
        donated the legal limit to the favored candidate — several get
        all or almost all of their contributions from these
        double-dipping donors. Together, the 2014 buddy groups in
        toss-up races took in $14.2 million from individuals, of
        which*$9.2 million came from people who maxed out to the favored
        candidate*with either $2,600 (the limit for one election) or
        $5,200 (the limit for giving to both a candidate’s primary and
        general election campaigns).
      * The biggest double-dipping donors gave half a million dollars to
        single-candidate groups — almost 100 times the limit for
        candidate contributions.

    /Dark money played a critical role in funding a new Senate./

      * *Dark money in Senate elections has more than doubled since
        2010*, from $105 million in inflation-adjusted dollars, to $226
        million in 2014.
      * Almost half of the $1 billion in 2014 dollars that outside
        spenders plowed into Senate elections over the last three
        cycles, $485 million, was dark money.
      * In the 11 most competitive races in 2014,*dark money comprised
        59 percent of nonparty outside spending*. In the 10 competitive
        races that we have candidate spending data for, dark money
        comprised 28 percent of total spending (candidate, party, and
        outside group).
      * *The winners in the 11 most competitive races in 2014 together
        had more than $131 million in dark money supporting them*— 71
        percent of the nonparty outside spending in their favor.


Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69633&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20Spending%202014%3A%20Outside%20Spending%20in%20Senate%20Races%20Since%20%E2%80%98Citizens%20United%27%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


    “New conservative group aims to build GOP support for reducing
    influence of big donors” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69631>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 7:02 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69631>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo reports. 
<http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/new-conservative-group-aims-to-build-gop-support-for-reducing-influence-of-big-donors/2015/01/13/3fc5e0b8-9b3f-11e4-a7ee-526210d665b4_story.html>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69631&title=%E2%80%9CNew%20conservative%20group%20aims%20to%20build%20GOP%20support%20for%20reducing%20influence%20of%20big%20donors%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Houston Has a Problem: The Constitutional Problems with Temporal
    Bans on Contributions” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69629>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 7:00 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69629>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bauer blogs. 
<http://www.moresoftmoneyhardlaw.com/2015/01/houston-problem-constitutional-problems-temporal-bans-contributions/>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69629&title=%E2%80%9CHouston%20Has%20a%20Problem%3A%20The%20Constitutional%20Problems%20with%20Temporal%20Bans%20on%20Contributions%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>


    “Will Won’t? Illinois County Plans to Fight Same-Day Registration”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69627>

Posted onJanuary 14, 2015 6:58 am 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69627>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

A Chapinblog. 
<http://blog.lib.umn.edu/cspg/electionacademy/2015/01/will_wont_illinois_county_plan.php>

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69627&title=%E2%80%9CWill%20Won%E2%80%99t%3F%20Illinois%20County%20Plans%20to%20Fight%20Same-Day%20Registration%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted inelection administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>


    “5 Years After ‘Citizens United,’ SuperPACs Continue To Grow”
    <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69625>

Posted onJanuary 13, 2015 8:54 pm 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=69625>byRick Hasen 
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Peter Overby reports 
<http://www.npr.org/2015/01/13/377024687/five-years-after-citizens-united-superpacs-continue-to-grow>for 
NPR.

Share 
<https://www.addtoany.com/share_save#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D69625&title=%E2%80%9C5%20Years%20After%20%E2%80%98Citizens%20United%2C%E2%80%99%20SuperPACs%20Continue%20To%20Grow%E2%80%9D&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme 
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

-- 
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/20150114/6c602fd9/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/20150114/6c602fd9/attachment.png>


View list directory