[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/22/19

Wed Jan 22 08:19:33 PST 2020

“Trump is attracting a new crop of big donors, including many who have never given before”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109106>
Posted on January 22, 2020 7:59 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109106> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo:<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-is-attracting-a-new-crop-of-big-donors-including-many-who-have-never-given-before/2020/01/21/a8229a6c-30c6-11ea-9313-6cba89b1b9fb_story.html>

Trump’s vaunted political money machine <https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-and-the-gop-raised-almost-half-a-billion-dollars-last-year--and-still-had-nearly-200-million-heading-into-2020/2020/01/03/10ba1612-2dad-11ea-bcd4-24597950008f_story.html?tid=lk_inline_manual_4> is helping drive record sums to the Republican National Committee, and not just from the same donors who supported him in 2016. Enticed by exclusive gatherings and ecstatic about the president’s tax cuts, an eclectic new crop of donors is going all in, giving five and six figures to support his reelection.

Their ranks include investors in a South Florida hot yoga studio, a Nigerian American real estate developer in Dallas and the head of a trucking business in Los Angeles. They have been joined by veteran GOP donors who have returned to the fold after sitting out Trump’s 2016 campaign.

The Washington Post identified at least 220 big donors to Trump’s reelection who are either new to major political giving or sat out the last presidential general election. Together, they have deluged pro-Trump fundraising committees with more than $21 million — a cash infusion that suggests a newfound enthusiasm for the president among supporters capable of writing large checks.

The influx of these donors represents a shift for Trump<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/pro-trump-groups-have-raised-55-million-from-136-wealthy-donors-report-finds/2018/12/20/1a298158-03c2-11e9-b5df-5d3874f1ac36_story.html?tid=lk_inline_manual_9>, who criticized other candidates’ reliance on wealthy backers during the 2016 election. This time, his campaign is actively wooing them, holding glitzy fundraisers that give people who donate large amounts a chance to mingle with his inner circle and often snap pictures with Trump himself.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109106&title=%E2%80%9CTrump%20is%20attracting%20a%20new%20crop%20of%20big%20donors%2C%20including%20many%20who%20have%20never%20given%20before%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>

“10 years after Citizens United: State races transformed by explosive growth in independent spending”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109104>
Posted on January 22, 2020 7:53 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109104> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

New report<https://www.followthemoney.org/research/institute-reports/10-years-after-citizens-united-state-races-transformed-by-explosive-growth-in-independent-spending> from the National Institute on Money in Politics.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109104&title=%E2%80%9C10%20years%20after%20Citizens%20United%3A%20State%20races%20transformed%20by%20explosive%20growth%20in%20independent%20spending%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>

“Common Cause Files Complaint Against Pro-Bernie Sanders Group Our Revolution for Violating Soft Money Ban”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109102>
Posted on January 22, 2020 7:51 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109102> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release<https://www.commoncause.org/press-release/common-cause-files-complaint-against-pro-bernie-sanders-group-our-revolution-for-violating-soft-money-ban/>:

Today, Common Cause filed a complaint<https://www.commoncause.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Our-Revolution-FEC-Complaint_FINAL1.22.20.pdf> with the Federal Election Commission (FEC) alleging reason to believe that Our Revolution, a nonprofit political organization established by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) in 2016 and now supporting his 2020 presidential campaign, violated the federal ‘soft money’ ban. Sen. Sanders has been a longtime critic of super PACs and so-called “Dark Money” groups. The complaint documents that Our Revolution has solicited contributions explicitly to elect Sanders president, received contributions far in excess of the applicable $5,000 contribution limit and spent funds in connection with federal elections, including current voter mobilization efforts supporting Sanders in Iowa.

Under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act, an entity directly or indirectly established by a federal candidate or officeholder is not allowed to “solicit, receive, direct, transfer, or spend funds in connection with an election for Federal office” unless the “funds are subject to the limitations, prohibitions, and reporting requirements” of federal law.

According to Our Revolution’s tax returns showing contribution amounts but not contributor names, data compiled and first reported by the Associated Press<https://apnews.com/345bbd1af529cfb1e41305fa3ab1e604>, from 2016 to 2018 Our Revolution raised almost $1 million dollars from contributors who gave in excess of the applicable $5,000 contribution limit, including multiple contributions of between $100,000 and $300,000. Our Revolution has not disclosed any of its contributors to the FEC, as required by federal campaign finance law.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109102&title=%E2%80%9CCommon%20Cause%20Files%20Complaint%20Against%20Pro-Bernie%20Sanders%20Group%20Our%20Revolution%20for%20Violating%20Soft%20Money%20Ban%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“As Americans Fear Foreign Interference, Federal Agencies Work To Secure Elections”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109100>
Posted on January 22, 2020 7:48 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109100> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Pam Fessler<https://www.npr.org/2020/01/21/798252808/as-americans-fear-foreign-interference-federal-agencies-work-to-secure-elections> for NPR:

PAM FESSLER, BYLINE: Late last year, an election official in a small Texas county got a curious phone call. Someone claimed to be from Hart InterCivic, the vendor who supplied the county’s voting machines. The caller asked about sensitive security measures and tried to get the official to log into unfamiliar websites.

SAM DERHEIMER: And she didn’t know the person on the other side of the phone, and red flags were raised immediately.

FESSLER: Sam Derheimer of Hart says the local official immediately called the company with her concerns. Hart then contacted the Department of Homeland Security, which issued an alert through an information-sharing group that includes election officials and vendors around the country.

DERHEIMER: It really laid out the incident as best we knew it, what had occurred and what to be wary of.

FESSLER: It turns out the woman was unknowingly the target of a security firm hired by her county to test its cyberdefenses. But for those who run elections, the quick national response was a sign of just how much progress has been made since Russia attacked the 2016 elections.

CHRISTOPHER KREBS: An election official that three or four years ago would have probably just blindly and blithely followed the instructions now is like, wait a second; that doesn’t sound right.

FESSLER: Christopher Krebs is pretty happy about that. He runs the agency within the Department of Homeland Security charged with helping to secure elections. Krebs isn’t surprised that voters are worried about what might happen this year, with all the reports of social media disinformation campaigns and a wave of ransomware attacks against local governments. But Krebs thinks voters should be more confident than they are.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109100&title=%E2%80%9CAs%20Americans%20Fear%20Foreign%20Interference%2C%20Federal%20Agencies%20Work%20To%20Secure%20Elections%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Election Security Boss: Threats To 2020 Are Now Broader, More Diverse”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109098>
Posted on January 22, 2020 7:46 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109098> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NPR<https://www.npr.org/2020/01/22/798186093/election-security-boss-threats-to-2020-are-now-broader-more-diverse>:

Threats to U.S. elections this year could be broader and more diverse than before, warns the spy world’s boss for election security — and she also acknowledged the limits of her ability to tackle them.

Shelby Pierson, the intelligence community’s election threats executive, told NPR in an exclusive interview that more nations may attempt more types of interference in the United States given the extensive lessons that have since been drawn about the Russian attack on the 2016 presidential election.

“This isn’t a Russia-only problem,” she told Noel King on Morning Edition. “We’re still also concerned about China, Iran, non-state actors, ‘hacktivists.’ And frankly … even Americans might be looking to undermine confidence in the elections.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109098&title=%E2%80%9CElection%20Security%20Boss%3A%20Threats%20To%202020%20Are%20Now%20Broader%2C%20More%20Diverse%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

“Exclusive: Seattle-Area Voters To Vote By Smartphone In 1st For U.S. Elections”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109095>
Posted on January 22, 2020 7:44 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109095> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

NPR:<https://www.npr.org/2020/01/22/798126153/exclusive-seattle-area-voters-to-vote-by-smartphone-in-1st-for-u-s-elections?utm_campaign=storyshare&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_medium=social>

A district encompassing Greater Seattle is set to become the first in which every voter can cast a ballot using a smartphone — a historic moment for American democracy.

The King Conservation District, a state environmental agency that encompasses Seattle and more than 30 other cities<https://www.google.com/maps/place/King+County,+WA/@47.4325157,-122.0835659,10z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m5!3m4!1s0x54905c8c832d7837:0xe280ab6b8b64e03e!8m2!3d47.5480339!4d-121.9836029>, is scheduled to detail the plan at a news conference on Wednesday. About 1.2 million eligible voters could take part….

In its bipartisan report on Russian election interference<https://www.npr.org/2019/07/25/745351734/read-senate-intelligence-report-on-russian-interference-in-the-2016-election>, released last year, the Senate Intelligence Committee said, “States should resist pushes for online voting.”

Many outside specialists continue to agree.

“There is a firm consensus in the cybersecurity community that mobile voting on a smartphone is a really stupid idea,” said Duncan Buell, a computer science professor at the University of South Carolina who specializes in election technology. “I don’t know that I have run across cybersecurity experts whose mortgages are not paid by a mobile-voting company who think it’s a good idea.”
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109095&title=%E2%80%9CExclusive%3A%20Seattle-Area%20Voters%20To%20Vote%20By%20Smartphone%20In%201st%20For%20U.S.%20Elections%E2%80%9D>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>

Wisconsin: “After rejection, conservatives try again to get voter purge case to Supreme Court”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109092>
Posted on January 22, 2020 7:23 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109092> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel reports.<https://www.jsonline.com/story/news/politics/2020/01/21/voter-purge-wisconsin-conservatives-try-again-case-high-court/4531430002/>

Update: The Court of Appeals opinion explaining its putting the purge on hold is here<https://drive.google.com/file/d/1LmeR9VO-V62Wfet93U_3nPcXT4rKQbr9/view>. (h/t Sam Levine)
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109092&title=Wisconsin%3A%20%E2%80%9CAfter%20rejection%2C%20conservatives%20try%20again%20to%20get%20voter%20purge%20case%20to%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%9D>
Posted in The Voting Wars<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=60>, voter registration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=37>

“CFI’s Guide to Money in Federal Elections, 1974-2018”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109089>
Posted on January 21, 2020 2:11 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109089> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Release via email about what will be a very useful compilation:

This week marks the tenth anniversary of the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. That decision, together with its offspring, were the major catalysts for a massive growth in independent spending over the past decade.

This week also marks the release of the new edition of CFI’s Guide to Money in Federal Elections<https://mx8.inboxgateway.com/ec/c/37348363-31709-179279>. The Campaign Finance Institute (CFI) is a division of the National Institute on Money in Politics (NIMP). The Guide’s co-authors are Michael J. Malbin (CFI’s director and a professor of political science at the University at Albany, SUNY) and Brendan Glavin (CFI’s senior data analyst).

If you want some sense of how much Citizens United has mattered, just turn to page 83 of the Guide. There you will learn that independent spending (IEs) in congressional elections by non-party spenders was 25 times [!] higher in 2018 as in 2008.

And this is only one of thousands of facts in this volume’s essays and tables.

For example, did you know . . .
·         Donald Trump raised more money from small donors in 2016 than Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton combined (pages 33 and 43)?
·         2018 was the first time in 30 years that successful U.S. House challengers actually spent more than the incumbents they beat (in other years they spent less, page 53)?
·         2018 was the first time the average cost of winning or keeping a seat in the House topped the $2 million mark (page 11)?

All this and much more is in the new Guide. It is loaded with tables, many of which reach back decades. The Guide is divided into four main sections: presidential elections, congressional elections, political parties, and independent spending.

This will be exactly the reference politics-watchers will need to give a good perspective on money in the elections of 2020. You can download or view a copy of the full publication here<https://mx8.inboxgateway.com/ec/c/37348363-31709-179279>. Any of the tables in the report can be also downloaded as spreadsheet files by using links located under each. Many of the tables present the information in inflation-adjusted dollars. Where they do, the downloaded versions include a separate tab with the dollar figures before adjustment. Feel free to use or republish the tables; please credit CFI/NIMP.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109089&title=%E2%80%9CCFI%E2%80%99s%20Guide%20to%20Money%20in%20Federal%20Elections%2C%201974-2018%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://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
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/20200122/d012d530/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/20200122/d012d530/attachment.png>