[EL] ELB News and Commentary 3/2/18

Thu Mar 1 22:19:22 PST 2018

Irregular Blogging Schedule for March<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97960>
Posted on March 1, 2018 10:17 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97960> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

With book events<http://www.law.uci.edu/events/2017-18/s2018/Hasen-Scalia-Book-Tour.html> and other events in March<https://schedule.sxsw.com/2018/events/PP78059> and early April,<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=96177> blogging and election law listserv messages may be more sporadic and coverage more sparse than usual.

Thanks for your patience,.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97960&title=Irregular%20Blogging%20Schedule%20for%20March>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Provisions attached to budget bills could reshape campaign finance laws”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97958>
Posted on March 1, 2018 10:10 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97958> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/provisions-attached-to-budget-bills-could-reshape-campaign-finance-laws/2018/03/01/7e06274c-1b3f-11e8-b2d9-08e748f892c0_story.html?utm_term=.00bce1c8d783>

A handful of provisions tucked into a pair of must-pass bills under consideration in Congress this month could reshape the financing of political campaigns and give further cover to donors who want to keep their contributions private.

One measure would roll back limits on churches, which are prohibited under current law from advocating for candidates because of their tax-exempt status.

Other changes would relax rules affecting secret and wealthy donors and increase the amount of cash that political parties could spend on candidates.

The adjustments are being considered in the form of “riders,” or provisions that are tacked on to unrelated bills. Such attachments are controversial because they can pass without a separate vote or debate. The maneuver also masks the identity of the member of Congress who proposed each change.

In this case, lawmakers have attached them to House and Senate versions of appropriations bills<https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/2018/02/12/c1d22e24-102e-11e8-8ea1-c1d91fcec3fe_story.html?utm_term=.ee1c48a2e23a>, which must pass this month to keep the government operational. Ultimately, one or more may be dropped as part of budget negotiations, but the proposals have nevertheless drawn a sharp rebuke from government watchdog groups.

On Thursday, a coalition of two dozen such groups released a letter <https://www.citizen.org/media/press-releases/leahy-lowey-schakowsky-coalition-leaders-call-clean-omnibus-package-excludes> urging Congress to reject these riders.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97958&title=%E2%80%9CProvisions%20attached%20to%20budget%20bills%20could%20reshape%20campaign%20finance%20laws%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

“Dark money group America First Policies is running a pro-Trump polling operation. Here is an inside look at its secretive work”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97956>
Posted on March 1, 2018 10:03 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97956> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

CNBC:<https://www.cnbc.com/2018/03/01/america-first-policies-dark-money-polling-for-trump.html>

America First Policies, a nonprofit group with close ties to President Donald Trump<https://www.cnbc.com/donald-trump/>, has hired Trump’s pollsters to conduct a wide range of political polling and research that experts say resembles the kind of expensive work the Republican National Committee has performed for prior GOP administrations.

Such a practice breaks with decades of tradition and raises concerns about potential coordination between the pro-Trump dark money group, the White House and the RNC. America First Policies and the RNC have denied coordinating. The White House did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

Over the past six months, CNBC has obtained more than 50 documents through an obscure portal on the America First Policies website.

Much of what the group polls and surveys would be standard work for a presidential campaign or a major political party. But America First Policies, which was founded days after Trump’s inauguration, is not a campaign or a party. It’s what the IRS calls a “social welfare organization,” permitted to operate tax-free and keep its donors secret as long as its main focus isn’t politics and it doesn’t coordinate with candidates.

Election lawyers typically interpret this to mean 51 percent of a group’s activities must be issue related. “Our primary purpose has to be issue related, but that doesn’t mean we can’t throw in questions that are news related or political [in our polling],” said Erin Montgomery, communications director for America First Policies.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97956&title=%E2%80%9CDark%20money%20group%20America%20First%20Policies%20is%20running%20a%20pro-Trump%20polling%20operation.%20Here%20is%20an%20inside%20look%20at%20its%20secretive%20work%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, tax law and election law<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=22>

“Turning Words into Action”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97954>
Posted on March 1, 2018 10:01 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97954> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Bruce Freed & Karl Sandstrom:<https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/02/27/turning-words-into-action/>

BlackRock CEO Larry Fink’s recent annual letter to corporate leaders (discussed on the Forum here<https://corpgov.law.harvard.edu/2018/01/17/a-sense-of-purpose/>) correctly urges companies to contribute to society. At a time when the private sector is being pressed to address major societal issues, his call is especially important. There’s a glaring omission, however: A business cannot begin to evaluate its social impact and business risk if it doesn’t openly and forthrightly address its spending to influence political elections, and the consequences of that spending.

This is the case when public companies spend more money politically, whether openly or through secret or hard-to-track conduits. Corporate money could be significant in affecting the outcome of this fall’s congressional and state elections, with major consequences for the nation and for companies.

Why is it critical that institutional and widely diversified investors such as BlackRock promote transparency and accountability?…
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97954&title=%E2%80%9CTurning%20Words%20into%20Action%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

“Meet The ‘Experts’ Kobach Is Using To Defend His Voter Fraud Claims In Court”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97952>
Posted on March 1, 2018 1:11 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97952> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

TPM reports.<https://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/kobach-experts-proof-of-citizenship-requirement>

[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97952&title=%E2%80%9CMeet%20The%20%E2%80%98Experts%E2%80%99%20Kobach%20Is%20Using%20To%20Defend%20His%20Voter%20Fraud%20Claims%20In%20Court%E2%80%9D>
Posted in fraudulent fraud squad<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=8>

“How the Minnesota SCOTUS case could affect what Californians wear to the polls”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97950>
Posted on March 1, 2018 12:56 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97950> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

I spoke with Larry Mantle of KPCC’s Airtalk. Listen.<https://www.scpr.org/programs/airtalk/2018/03/01/61968/how-the-minnesota-scotus-case-could-affect-what-ca/>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97950&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20the%20Minnesota%20SCOTUS%20case%20could%20affect%20what%20Californians%20wear%20to%20the%20polls%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>

Good Example for Minnesota Political Apparel Case at SCOTUS: 2008 Dispute over Whether Toilet “Plungers Represent Support for a Political Candidate”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97946>
Posted on March 1, 2018 12:37 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=97946> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

One of the issues which came out at the oral argument in Minnesota Voters Alliance v,. Mansky<http://electionlawblog.org/?p=97933>  is whether election officials can make a good faith effort to determine whether something is political and needs to be excluded from the polling place.

MR. ROGAN: So, Your Honor, the — I think the — the answer is that it has two components to it. It has to be understood as relating to electoral choices and it has to be well-known. So many of the examples that — that you talked about simply wouldn’t be well-known. It’s — it’s a reasonable observer sitting in the polling place on Election Day, after there’s been a campaign, after there’s been the issues that have been raised that are relevant to the election, deciding whether or not they believe that it’s reasonable to understand the message being -

JUSTICE ALITO: Yeah. Well, that makes it worse, that it has to be — well, it’s not only does it have to be a political message, but it has to be well-known. What - what is well-known?

MR. ROGAN: Well, Your Honor, the political has a — has a plain meaning in our statute based on that it — it’s influencing elections. What I — all that I’m describing is that something that is political, for example, that is known to only a few people but is clearly political, is not going to be something that’s going to be reasonably understood by voters in the polling place.

A reader recalled a dispute<http://halfempth.blogspot.com/2008/11/another-election-story-toilet-plungers.html> over 1,000 toilet plungers distributed to bring to Texas polling places could be support for John McCain in the 2008 presidential campaign (thanks to support by “Joe the Plumber.”)

The Obama campaign issued a memo <http://electionlawblog.org/wp-content/uploads/plunger-memo.pdf> taking the position that “plungers represent support for a political candidate” and bringing them to the polling place was electioneering.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D97946&title=Good%20Example%20for%20Minnesota%20Political%20Apparel%20Case%20at%20SCOTUS%3A%202008%20Dispute%20over%20Whether%20Toilet%20%E2%80%9CPlungers%20Represent%20Support%20for%20a%20Political%20Candidate%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, Supreme Court<https://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
rhasen at law.uci.edu<mailto:rhasen at law.uci.edu>
http://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/
http://electionlawblog.org<http://electionlawblog.org/>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180302/7d68a649/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 2021 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20180302/7d68a649/attachment.png>