[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/11/16
Rick Hasen
rhasen at law.uci.edu
Mon Jan 11 08:15:36 PST 2016
“What Will the Presidential Elections Cost Us?”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78899>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 8:13 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78899>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
@KCRW and Zocalo Public Square aresponsoring the kickoff
<http://events.kcrw.com/events/2016/1/12/what-will-the-presidential-elections-cost-us>tomorrow
(Jan. 12) for mybook tour
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=77845>forPlutocrats United: Campaign
Money, the Supreme Court and the Distortion of American Elections
<http://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453/ref=la_B0089NJCR2_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1430416698&sr=1-7>.
Over the weekend Greg Sargentreviewed the book
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-rid-politics-of-its-pollution-by-wealthy-donors/2016/01/06/74798932-a2a4-11e5-ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html>for
the Washington Post, and Gilad Edelmanreviewed for the Washington
Monthly
<http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/januaryfebruary_2016/on_political_books/how_to_corral_the_the_donor_cl059201.php>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78899&title=%26%238220%3BWhat%20Will%20the%20Presidential%20Elections%20Cost%20Us%3F%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“How to Corral the the Donor Class: When it comes to money in
politics, the real problem is not corruption, but inequality.”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78901>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 8:12 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78901>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Gialed Edelman
<http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/magazine/januaryfebruary_2016/on_political_books/how_to_corral_the_the_donor_cl059201.php?page=all>reviews
my new book,Plutocrats United,
<http://www.amazon.com/Plutocrats-United-Campaign-Distortion-Elections/dp/0300212453/ref=la_B0089NJCR2_1_7?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1430416698&sr=1-7>for
the Washington Monthly.
Anyone who is worried about the role of money in politics should
take a clear message from Hasen’s book: it’s all about 2016. Polls
show campaign finance to be a low priority for most voters, but the
excessive influence of wealth distorts government policy on things
that people do care about, like economic regulation, taxation, and
health care, and that they should care about but don’t, like climate
change. As income inequality grows, so will the power of the tiny
donor class, which will in turn make it ever harder to enact
policies aimed at reversing that inequality. There’s no way of
getting around the irony: only the power of a majority vote has a
chance of curtailing the power of money to undermine the principle
of majority rule. Citizens interested in overturning/Citizens
United/should consider uniting.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78901&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20to%20Corral%20the%20the%20Donor%20Class%3A%20When%20it%20comes%20to%20money%20in%20politics%2C%20the%20real%20problem%20is%20not%20corruption%2C%20but%20inequality.%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Supreme Court Won’t Hear Appeal From Former Alabama Governor”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78897>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 8:03 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78897>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Another<http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2016/01/11/us/politics/ap-us-supreme-court-former-alabama-governor.html?ref=politics&_r=0>Gov.
Seligman cert. denial.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78897&title=%26%238220%3BSupreme%20Court%20Won%26%238217%3Bt%20Hear%20Appeal%20From%20Former%20Alabama%20Governor%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inbribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Prince William Electoral Board chair under investigation, may lose
job” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78895>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 8:01 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78895>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Inside NoVa
<http://www.insidenova.com/headlines/prince-william-electoral-board-chair-under-investigation-may-lose-job/article_d00ff976-b6e4-11e5-a24e-63715e17f125.html>:
An unauthorized investigation aimed at uncovering possible voter
fraud might cost Prince William County Electoral Board Chairman Guy
Anthony “Tony” Guiffré his job.
The Virginia State Board of Elections took a rare vote Friday to
initiate steps to remove Guiffré from the county electoral board
over allegations he compromised voter privacy and might have broken
state and federal laws. The allegations stem from his efforts to
determine whether absentee ballots were improperly requested for the
Nov. 3 election.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78895&title=%26%238220%3BPrince%20William%20Electoral%20Board%20chair%20under%20investigation%2C%20may%20lose%20job%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inchicanery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,election
administration <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>
“TV stations work hard to hide cost of political ads”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78893>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 7:53 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78893>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Meredith McGehee writes
<http://www.abqjournal.com/703538/opinion/tv-stations-work-hard-to-hide-cost-of-political-ads.html>for
the Albuquerque Journal.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78893&title=%26%238220%3BTV%20stations%20work%20hard%20to%20hide%20cost%20of%20political%20ads%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,campaigns
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“Building ‘Laundromats,’ Killing Political Parties”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78891>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 7:50 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78891>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Meredith McGehee
<http://www.huffingtonpost.com/meredith-mcgehee/building-laundromats-kill_b_8938412.html>:
During consideration of the 2015 Omnibus budget bill, Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) unsuccessfully tried to
insert a rider to eliminate coordinated spending limits for
political parties. He lost because of opposition from an unlikely
coalition — most (though not all) Democrats and some Tea Party
Republicans who don’t trust their party’s establishment. Sen.
McConnell made this move under the guise of “strengthening the
political parties but in reality, it would have provided yet another
avenue for big money to enter into American campaigns.
This renewed “concern” about the health of America’s political
parties is entirely predictable in the aftermath of after the
Citizens United decision. That opinion and its progeny, opened the
floodgates to virtually unlimited spending in American elections,
and paved the way for the creation of Super PACs and dark-money groups.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78891&title=%26%238220%3BBuilding%20%26%238216%3BLaundromats%2C%26%238217%3B%20Killing%20Political%20Parties%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Corruption or Politics: Supreme Court Weighs McDonnell Case”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78889>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 7:49 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78889>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Jacob
Gershman<http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2016/01/08/corruption-or-politics-supreme-court-weighs-mcdonnell-case/>for
the WSJ law blog.
I’m expecting a cert grant, and now it appears we have a relist (nothing
about the case intoday’s orders)
<http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/011116zor_n7io.pdf>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78889&title=%26%238220%3BCorruption%20or%20Politics%3A%20Supreme%20Court%20Weighs%20McDonnell%20Case%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inbribery <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=54>,chicanery
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“A Speech Mugging in Montana” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78887>
Posted onJanuary 11, 2016 7:47 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78887>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
WSJ editorial:
<http://www.wsj.com/articles/a-speech-mugging-in-montana-1452297515>
Laws restricting political speech are easily abused for partisan
gain, as we’ve seen with the IRS and Wisconsin’s John Doe
investigation. The latest example is unfolding in Montana, where a
state official is taking revenge against a political rival.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78887&title=%26%238220%3BA%20Speech%20Mugging%20in%20Montana%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Voting on trial: ACLU case against Ferguson-Florissant goes to
court” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78885>
Posted onJanuary 10, 2016 8:27 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78885>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
St. Louis Public Radio
<http://news.stlpublicradio.org/post/voting-trial-aclu-case-against-ferguson-florissant-goes-court>:
Are African-American voters in the Ferguson-Florissant school
district shortchanged because board members there are elected
at-large? Or would dividing the district into subdistricts actually
weaken the clout of black voters, not increase it?
U.S. District Judge Rodney Sippel will hear arguments for both sides
of the issue this week in a lawsuit filed by the American Civil
Liberties Union. The ACLU claims that the racial history of the
makeup of the board shows that African Americans do not have
representation proportional to their population.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78885&title=%26%238220%3BVoting%20on%20trial%3A%20ACLU%20case%20against%20Ferguson-Florissant%20goes%20to%20court%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inThe Voting Wars <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>,Voting
Rights Act <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=15>
“The Kentucky Law Journal Symposium: Judicial Regulation of Politics
in an Election Year” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78883>
Posted onJanuary 10, 2016 7:27 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78883>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Details
<http://www.uky.edu/electionlaw/analysis/kentucky-law-journal-symposium-judicial-regulation-politics-election-year>for
the Jan. 22 event.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78883&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20Kentucky%20Law%20Journal%20Symposium%3A%20Judicial%20Regulation%20of%20Politics%20in%20an%20Election%20Year%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inpedagogy <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=23>
“SCOTUS v. the American worker: The upcoming Supreme Court case that
could explode inequality” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78881>
Posted onJanuary 10, 2016 7:04 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78881>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Liz Kennedy writes
<http://www.salon.com/2016/01/08/scotus_v_the_american_worker_the_upcoming_supreme_court_case_that_could_explode_inequality/>for
Salon.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78881&title=%26%238220%3BSCOTUS%20v.%20the%20American%20worker%3A%20The%20upcoming%20Supreme%20Court%20case%20that%20could%20explode%20inequality%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
ELB Podcast Episode 9. Ben Ginsberg: The Republican Nomination
Battle for President <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78868>
Posted onJanuary 10, 2016 5:00 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78868>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Will the Republican presidential nomination fight go beyond the
primaries to a contested convention? Are the rules Republicans passed to
assign delegates going to lead to chaos? What’s different about this
election cycle, and are Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders fighting for the
same voters?
On Episode 9 of the ELB Podcast, we talk to noted Republican campaign
attorneyBen Ginsberg <http://www.jonesday.com/bginsberg/>.
You can listen to the ELB Podcast Episode 8
onSoundcloud<https://t.co/IWH9l2eWWF>orsubscribe at iTunes
<https://geo.itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/elb-podcast/id1029317166?mt=2>.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78868&title=ELB%20Podcast%20Episode%209.%20Ben%20Ginsberg%3A%20The%20Republican%20Nomination%20Battle%20for%20President&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>,ELB Podcast
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=116>,political parties
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=25>,primaries
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=32>
“How Corporate Political Spending Will Stay Secret in Wisconsin”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78878>
Posted onJanuary 9, 2016 9:42 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78878>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Brendan Fischer blogs.
<http://www.prwatch.org/news/2016/01/13012/corporate-political-donations-stay-secret>
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78878&title=%26%238220%3BHow%20Corporate%20Political%20Spending%20Will%20Stay%20Secret%20in%20Wisconsin%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
“Informing Shareholders: Providing a Roadmap for the SEC to Act to
Require Public Corporations to Disclose Political Spending”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78876>
Posted onJanuary 9, 2016 9:40 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78876>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
William Nelson has postedthis draft
<http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2711260>on SSRN
(forthcoming, Albany Government Law Review). Here is the abstract:
The Supreme Court erred by not revisiting its holding in Citizens
United v. Federal Election Commission (FEC). I made this argument in
a previous article. The Supreme Court’s decision “removed the
prohibition on corporate independent political expenditures, and
allows corporations to spend unlimited sums from corporate
treasuries to expressly advocate the election or defeat of a
political candidate.” Unfortunately, my pleas to the high court went
unanswered. However, the Securities Exchange Commission (SEC) has a
chance to shine light on this issue by requiring public corporations
to disclose to shareholders the use of corporate resources for
political activities.
Disclosure of corporate political spending would ensure that
directors adhere to their duties of full and fair disclosure to
shareholders. Additionally, disclosure of corporate political
spending would diminish monitoring costs by informing shareholders
of harmful political spending and will provide potential investors
with key information for making informed, rational investment
decisions. Due to the misguided decision in Citizens United, it is
legal for corporations to spend an unlimited amount of money on
political issues; however, this Article submits that shareholders
need to know about those expenditures and that if corporations truly
believe their political spending benefits their bottom lines, they
should not oppose disclosure of that spending.
The Article begins by discussing the original and amended petitions
for rulemaking, including the reasoning behind them and the response
received from shareholders and the community at large. The Article
then transitions into an analysis of why the rule is both
constitutional and within SEC’s jurisdiction; responds to opposition
arguments alleging that a rule is not necessary; discusses the
recent lawsuit filed to compel the SEC to promulgate a rule; and
researches possible benefits and costs imposed by a mandatory
disclosure obligation. The Article concludes by providing
shareholders with options under the current regulatory regime to
investigate corporations’ political spending, provides a model
structure for SEC if and when they decide to initiate a rulemaking
on this issue and provides a model for firms to establish programs
to supervise corporate political spending.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78876&title=%26%238220%3BInforming%20Shareholders%3A%20Providing%20a%20Roadmap%20for%20the%20SEC%20to%20Act%20to%20Require%20Public%20Corporations%20to%20Disclose%20Political%20Spending%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Supreme
Court <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
“Cruz ‘birther’ debate comes to Cincinnati”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78874>
Posted onJanuary 9, 2016 9:38 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78874>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Cincinnati Enquirer:
<http://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2016/01/06/cruz-birther-debate-comes-cincinnati/78373808/>
Donald Trump isn’t the only one talking about whether fellow
Republican Ted Cruz is eligible to be president.
A Cincinnati voter asked the Hamilton County Board of Elections on
Wednesday to dive into the debate over whether Cruz is a
“natural-born citizen.” Bill Sloat, a longtime Cincinnati resident
and former newspaper reporter, said in a letter to the board that
state and local officials should make every effort to validate
Cruz’s candidacy before Ohio voters cast ballots in the March 15
primary.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78874&title=%26%238220%3BCruz%20%26%238216%3Bbirther%26%238217%3B%20debate%20comes%20to%20Cincinnati%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaigns <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>
“The New Chevron Skeptics” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78871>
Posted onJanuary 9, 2016 9:34 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78871>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
You can nowwatch the video <https://youtu.be/qMShFGCtLXw>of this panel
at theFederalis Society Annual faculty conference
<http://www.fed-soc.org/events/detail/18th-annual-faculty-conference>:
_*Panel: The New Chevron Skeptics*_* –/Event Video/*
<https://youtu.be/qMShFGCtLXw>
* Moderator:*Prof. John McGinnis*, Northwestern University School
of Law
* *Prof. Michael Herz*, Yeshiva University Benjamin N. Cardozo
School of Law
* *Prof. Jeffrey Pojanowski*, University of Notre Dame Law School
* *Prof. Peter Strauss*, Columbia Law School
* *Prof. Christopher Walker*, The Ohio State University Moritz
College of Law
Description: When Chevron was first decided it was generally
welcomed on the right side of the political spectrum as a principled
method constraining judicial discretion and permitting the executive
to exert policy control over the administrative state. But as the
administrative state continues to grow, some now see Chevron as
removing an important check on government power and an abdication of
the judiciary’s authority to say what the law is. Some members of
the Supreme Court are now open to reconsidering judicial deference
to agency action, at least in certain areas, such as determining
their own jurisdictions and interpreting their own regulations. The
panel will consider the extent to which the new skepticism toward
Chevron in particular and judicial deference to agencies in general
is justified.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78871&title=%26%238220%3BThe%20New%20Chevron%20Skeptics%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted inlegislation and legislatures
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=27>,statutory interpretation
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=21>
“In battle over ‘forced recusals,’ Louisiana Supreme Court justice
takes his case to federal court” <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78866>
Posted onJanuary 8, 2016 3:12 pm
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78866>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Fascinating
<http://theadvocate.com/news/neworleans/neworleansnews/14474150-123/in-battle-over-forced-recusals-la-supreme-court-justice-takes-his-case-to-federal-court>:
In an unusual legal skirmish, Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Jeff
Hughes filed a federal lawsuit over the holidays against four of his
fellow justices, challenging their decision to exclude Hughes from
participating in consideration of two so-called legacy lawsuits
before the high court because the plaintiffs’ attorneys contributed
hundreds of thousands of dollars to his 2012 election.
Hughes, a Republican from Livingston Parish who is in his first term
on the court, asked a federal judge to undo his “forced recusal”
from the cases, claiming his colleagues on the bench effectively
have placed “unconstitutional limits on the amount of money a person
can contribute to a political action committee.”
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78866&title=%26%238220%3BIn%20battle%20over%20%E2%80%98forced%20recusals%2C%E2%80%99%20Louisiana%20Supreme%20Court%20justice%20takes%20his%20case%20to%20federal%20court%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,judicial
elections <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=19>
Greg Sargent Reviews Plutocrats United for Washington Post Sunday
Book World <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78864>
Posted onJanuary 8, 2016 11:07 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78864>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
Review
<https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-rid-politics-of-its-pollution-by-wealthy-donors/2016/01/06/74798932-a2a4-11e5-ad3f-991ce3374e23_story.html>:
In the end, what may matter most is the view of a mere nine people.
Four current Supreme Court justices — two liberals and two
conservatives — are likely to retire in the next eight years. So the
2016 election could decide the makeup of the next court — and
whether reform happens anytime soon.
Hasen advises reformers to prep for an Armageddon-like showdown over
the court’s future — and to develop their equality-based arguments
now in preparation for a court that might be more receptive to
future reforms based upon them. In this sense, Hasen’s book is best
seen as a war manual designed to equip and fortify would-be
reformers for a brutal and uncertain struggle that could drag on for
years to come — but that must be waged to prevent our democracy from
sinking deeper and deeper into plutocracy.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78864&title=Greg%20Sargent%20Reviews%20Plutocrats%20United%20for%20Washington%20Post%20Sunday%20Book%20World&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>,Supreme Court
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>
Pity the Billionaire <http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78862>
Posted onJanuary 8, 2016 10:48 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78862>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
With all
<http://www.politico.com/story/2016/01/charles-koch-2016-presidential-race-217499>the
money the Kochs are pouring into politics, “You’d think we could have
more influence,” Charles Koch said.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78862&title=Pity%20the%20Billionaire&description=>
Posted incampaign finance
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>,Plutocrats United
<http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>
“Two agencies at odds on whether law allows secret donations”
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78860>
Posted onJanuary 8, 2016 10:45 am
<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=78860>byRick Hasen
<http://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>
The latest
<http://www.jsonline.com/news/statepolitics/two-agencies-at-odds-on-whether-law-allows-secret-donations-b99648271z1-364664561.html>from
WI.
Share
<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=http%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D78860&title=%26%238220%3BTwo%20agencies%20at%20odds%20on%20whether%20law%20allows%20secret%20donations%26%238221%3B&description=>
Posted incampaign finance <http://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>
--
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/20160111/3e784d18/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/20160111/3e784d18/attachment.png>
View list directory