[EL] Republican Nirvana

jboppjr jboppjr at aol.com
Tue Jul 7 10:29:31 PDT 2015


    
Waldman's article surely sets a modern record for the number of distortions and misrepresentations per column inch. But what is most noteworthy is his willful blindness. Absurdly low contribution limits are the wellspring from which superpacs and c4 participation in politics flows and not a word about them. Contribution limits are the handy work of reformers, not free speech Republicans. And until this is fixed, reformers will just continue to play whack-a-mole and the system will continue to lose transparency and accountability. Jim Bopp


Sent via the Samsung Galaxy Note® 4, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone

-------- Original message --------
From: Rick Hasen <rhasen at law.uci.edu> 
Date: 07/07/2015  12:36 PM  (GMT-05:00) 
To: law-election at UCI.edu 
Subject: [EL] ELB News and Commentary 7/715 


    
    
      
        
          “Republicans have won the battle
              over money in politics. Should anyone celebrate?”
        
        
          Posted on July 7,
                2015 9:32 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Paul Waldman at The Plum
          Line.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in campaign finance, campaigns
      
    
    
      
        
          “Trump’s Super-PAC
              in a (Post Office) Box”
        
        
          Posted on July 7,
                2015 9:29 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Bloomberg reports.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in Uncategorized
      
    
    
      
        
          “In Rio Grande Valley, Some Campaign Workers
              Are Paid To Harvest Votes”
        
        
          Posted on July 7,
                2015 9:26 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        NPR:
        
          This week,
              NPR examines public corruption in South Texas. The FBI has
              launched a task force to clean up entrenched wrongdoing by
              public servants in the Rio Grande Valley. In the final
              part of this series, we
              examine vote-stealing and election fraud.
          A new FBI
            anti-corruption task force is trying to clean up the Rio
            Grande Valley of Texas. According to the Justice Department,
            in 2013, more public officials were
              convicted for corruption in South Texas than
            in any other region of the country. One of the practices the
            task force is looking at is vote-stealing.
          They’re called politiqueras
              — a word
            unique to the border that means campaign worker. It’s a
            time-honored tradition down in the land of grapefruit
            orchards and Border Patrol checkpoints. If a local candidate
            needs dependable votes, he or she goes to apolitiquera.
          In recent years,
            losing candidates in local elections began to challenge vote
            harvesting by politiqueras in the Rio Grande
            Valley, and they shared their investigations with
            authorities. After the 2012 election cycle, the Justice
            Department and the Texas attorney general’s office filed
            charges.
        
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in chicanery
      
    
    
      
        
          Bauer Critical of SCOTUS AZ
              Redistricting Decision and Renzi Cert. Denial
        
        
          Posted on July 7,
                2015 9:17 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Interesting read:
        
          The doctrinal fine
            points are open to be debate, but it is hard to escape the
            impression that Court believes readily in the failures of
            the democratic process and the part played in this breakdown
            by self-interested legislators.   And it won’t overlook
            wrongdoing or allow the legislator’s constitutional
            defenses–perhaps also judged to be tainted by
            self-interest?–to get in the way.
        
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in redistricting, Speech or Debate Clause, Supreme Court
      
    
    
      
        
          “Why Nonprofits
              Get Away With Campaigning”
        
        
          Posted on July 7,
                2015 9:15 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Noah Feldman column.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in campaign finance
      
    
    
      
        
          “Who Owns Your Politics?”
        
        
          Posted on July 7,
                2015 9:12 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        New America Foundation:
        
          A common piece of
            advice for new hires is to avoid talking about politics,
            sex, and religion in the workplace. But it may be
            increasingly difficult for workers to keep their politics to
            themselves. Thanks to the Citizens United v. FEC Supreme
            Court decision from 2010, as well as new organizational
            infrastructure developed over the past decade, employers now
            have broad legal rights and the technical means to campaign
            for political candidates in the workplace. Managers and
            supervisors can even require that their workers participate
            in politics as a condition of employment.
        
        
          
            
              Employer
                mobilization is important to understand because it
                offers companies an opportunity to shape public policy
                using a resource already at their disposal: their
                workforce. Debates over corporate lobbying and the power
                of business in politics thus ought to consider employer
                mobilization just as much as they focus on campaign
                contributions and lobbyists.
              This policy brief
                provides an important contribution to our understanding
                of the prevalence of employer mobilization and how firms
                think about mobilization as a political strategy.
                Subsequent sections document the history of employer
                mobilization, tracing the social, economic, and
                political shifts that have made mobilization more
                appealing to firms in recent decades. The final portion
                of this brief describes why and how political reformers
                should take action to end the most coercive forms of
                employer mobilization, suggesting a range of possible
                legislative and voluntary actions that would shield
                workers from political intimidation in the workplace.
              Alexander Hertel-Fernandez
                  is a doctoral candidate in government and social
                  policy at Harvard University. He studies the political
                  economy of the United States, with an emphasis on the
                  politics of organized interests, especially business,
                  and public policy.
              To read the whole
                paper, click here.
            
          
        
        
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in campaign finance, campaigns
      
    
    
      
        
          Breaking: DC Circuit En Banc Unanimously
              Upholds Ban on Federal Contractor Contributions to
              Candidates
        
        
          Posted on July 7,
                2015 8:39 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        You can read the 62-page opinion at this link. This is quite a
          big deal, especially in its unanimity. The en banc DC Circuit
          in Wagner v. FEC holds
          that the ban on contractor contributions to federal candidates
          is supported by two interests: (1) preventing corruption and
          (2) promoting sound merit-based administration of federal
          contracts.  On the first point, the court discussed the
          special dangers of corruption which occur in the contracting
          process. The court surveys various state and federal
          corruption scandals, many of which involve the procurement of
          government contracts. On the second interest, the court relies
          in large part on the Hatch Act cases, in particular on the
          government’s interest in somewhat curtailing the First
          Amendment activities of government employees in order to
          assure a merit-based governmental process.
        Perhaps what is most important
          doctrinally about this ruling is the court’s rejection of the
          argument that a higher level of scrutiny should apply because
          the law imposes a ban, rather than merely a limit, on contractor
          contributions.  Relying upon the Supreme Court’s decision in FEC v. Beaumont(which
          upheld the ban on corporate contributions to candidates), the
          Court held the ban was still subject to the lesser “exacting
          scrutiny” which applies to contribution limits. Opponents of
          the ban have argued that Beaumont‘s reasoning has been undermined
          by more recent Supreme Court cases, such as Citizens United. But
          the DC Circuit did not accept that argument.
        This question (the vitality of Beaumont and the
          constitutionality of a ban, rather than limit on
          contributions) remains the most interesting issue which could
          provide a basis for the Supreme Court to grant cert. in the
          case. It is not clear whether the Court will bite on this one,
          for reasons I will be writing about in coming days.
        Also interesting is that the DC
          Circuit did not address whether federal contractors may make
          contributions to Super PACs. (“Nor do they challenge the law
          as the Commission might seek to apply it to donations to PACs
          that themselves make only independent expenditures, commonly
          known as “Super PACs.” Oral Arg. Recording 5:59-26:33 (“Super
          PACs . . . . are not at issue here; none of my clients wants
          to make a contribution to them or anything like them.”).)  If
          indeed contractors can make such contributions, then the ban
          won’t be all that effective in stopping corruption.
        [This post has been updated.]
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in campaign finance
      
    
    
      
        
          “Nonprofit Group Tied to Marco Rubio Raises
              Millions While Shielding Donors”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 8:50 pm by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        NYT reports.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in campaign finance, tax law and election law
      
    
    
      
        
          “On eve of
              historic voter suppression trial, battle lines are drawn
              in NC-NAACP v McCrory (Part I)”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 2:53 pm by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        DocDawg at Daily Kos.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in Department of Justice, election administration, The Voting Wars, voter id, Voting Rights Act
      
    
    
      
        
          “Here are the secret ways super PACs and
              campaigns can work together”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 1:36 pm by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Matea Gold on how
          coordination does not really mean coordination.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in campaign finance, campaigns
      
    
    
      
        
          “State to review thousands of motor voter
              registration complaints”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 1:34 pm by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        The Houston Chronicle reports.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in NVRA (motor voter)
      
    
    
      
        
          SCOTUS AZ Redistricting Case
              Affecting Arguments over Standing in Immigration Case
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 1:33 pm by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Josh Gerstein explains.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in Supreme Court
      
    
    
      
        
          “Why Company Towns
              Are Bad for People”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 9:36 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Must read Victor Valle at Zocalo on the most
          recent “election” in LA County’s “City of Industry.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in Uncategorized
      
    
    
      
        
          “Supreme Court Sends Signals to Request
              Cases They Want to Hear”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 8:26 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        New Adam Liptak Sidebar column:
        
          Supreme Court justices like to say
            that they have no agenda. Cases come to them unbidden. They
            decide the ones that need deciding.
          The reality
            is more complicated. The justices sometimes use their
            opinions to send messages about the kinds of cases they
            would like to hear.
          Bat signals
            sent in the term that just ended included one from Justice
            Anthony M. Kennedy, who asked for a case about solitary
            confinement, and another from Justices Stephen G. Breyer and
            Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who asked to consider the
            constitutionality of the death penalty.
          The next
            term, which starts in October, will feature three cases
            brought at least partly in response to similar invitations.
        
        I have written about this phenomenon
          and related ways Supreme Court Justices try to move the law in Anticipatory Overrulings,
              Invitations, Time Bombs, and Inadvertence: How Supreme
              Court Justices Move the Law, 61 Emory Law Journal 779 (2012).
            [corrected link]
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in Supreme Court
      
    
    
      
        
          “Analysis: Despite Ruling, Redistricting
              Reformers Pessimistic”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 8:15 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Ross Ramsey in the Texas Tribune:
        
          Texas does not have an
            independent redistricting commission and is probably not
            going to get one.
          But the lawmakers who
            have been ignoring the idea for years lost one of their
            excuses: In a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme
            Court turned back a challenge to Arizona’s commission,
            saying the voters had the right to take that power away from
            legislators.
        
         
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in Elections Clause, redistricting, Supreme Court
      
    
    
      
        
          “One for the People”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 8:11 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        Steven Mazie for The Economist on the SCOTUS AZ
          redistricting case.
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in redistricting, Supreme Court
      
    
    
      
        
          “The Health of State Democracies: Liberty
              and Justice for All?”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 8:08 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        D.C. Event Tuesday:
        
          Please join the Center
            for American Progress Action Fund as it launches a new
            report on the health of state democracies.
          The U.S. Constitution
            guarantees certain rights and privileges within our
            democracy. In practice, however, the extent to which
            citizens experience the robust benefits of a truly
            democratic society is too often determined by decisions made
            at the state level. Examining the areas of accessibility of
            the ballot, strength of representation in state government,
            and influence in the political system, going off report “The
            Health of State Democracies” contends that these issues must
            be addressed in sum—and no longer in silos.
          Join the Center for
            American Progress Action Fund for a panel discussion with
            state policymakers and other democracy experts as they speak
            to the challenges and opportunities ahead—from in-state
            legislative and ballot measure campaigns, to removing
            structural barriers so that voters truly have a voice in the
            democratic process, to a broader look at the need to address
            these issues as a comprehensive package of pro-democracy
            reforms.
          Featured
              panelists:

            Former Sen. Nina Turner (D-OH)

            Sen. Roger Katz (R-ME)

            Del. Alfonso Lopez (D-VA)

            Dara Lindenbaum

            , Senior Associate at Sandler Reiff Lamb Rosenstein &
            Birkenstock
          Moderated
              by:

            Michele Jawando, Vice
            President for Legal Progress, Center for American Progress
            Action Fund
          Coffee
                will be served at 9:30 a.m.
          RSVP
          RSVP for this event →
        
         
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in election administration, The Voting Wars
      
    
    
      
        
          “Walker office operating as if proposed open
              records exemptions are law”
        
        
          Posted on July 6,
                2015 7:29 am by Rick Hasen
        
      
      
        JS Online:
        
          Gov. Scott Walker
            announced over the weekend that Republicans would not create
            new exceptions to the state’s open records law, but for
            months the all-but-certain presidential candidate has been
            operating as if the exemptions were already in place.
          Two months ago, Walker
            declined to make public records related to his proposal to
            rewrite the University of Wisconsin System’s mission
            statement and release the Wisconsin Idea from state law. He
            argued he didn’t have to release those records to the
            Milwaukee Journal Sentinel and others because they were part
            of his office’s internal deliberations.
          The Progressive
            magazine and the Center for Media and Democracy sued Walker
            over those denials. The cases are pending in Dane County
            Circuit Court.
        
        
          
        
      
      
        Posted in Uncategorized
      
    
    -- 
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/20150707/3af7d86a/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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0001.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0002.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0003.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0005.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0006.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0007.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0008.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0009.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0010.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0011.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0012.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0013.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0014.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0015.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0016.png>
-------------- 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/20150707/3af7d86a/attachment-0017.png>


View list directory