[EL] ELB News and Commentary 1/23/19

[Rick Hasen]

“Big-money groups aligned with Senate GOP raised $68.3 million in 2019, an off-year record, officials say”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109126>
Posted on January 23, 2020 8:28 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109126> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WaPo reports.<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/big-money-groups-aligned-with-senate-gop-raised-683-million-in-2019-an-off-year-record-officials-say/2020/01/22/d3993ddc-3d45-11ea-b90d-5652806c3b3a_story.html>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109126&title=%E2%80%9CBig-money%20groups%20aligned%20with%20Senate%20GOP%20raised%20%2468.3%20million%20in%202019%2C%20an%20off-year%20record%2C%20officials%20say%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>


“American voters worry they can’t spot misleading information, poll finds”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109124>
Posted on January 23, 2020 8:17 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109124> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

PBS<https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/social-media-disinformation-leads-election-security-concerns-poll-finds>:

The new survey from PBS NewsHour, NPR and Marist Poll found that 59 percent of Americans say it is hard to identify false information — intentionally misleading and inaccurate stories portrayed as truth — on social media. Another 37 percent disagreed, saying it is easy to spot.

Furthermore, with the 2020 presidential campaign about to pick up in earnest, more than half of U.S. adults said discerning these fake or deceptive stories has become increasingly difficult over the last four years. That sentiment was shared by 58 percent of Democrats, 55 percent of independents and a slightly lower proportion of Republicans at 44 percent.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109124&title=%E2%80%9CAmerican%20voters%20worry%20they%20can%E2%80%99t%20spot%20misleading%20information%2C%20poll%20finds%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


“Tech Companies Volunteer to Beef Up Presidential Campaigns’ Cybersecurity”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109122>
Posted on January 23, 2020 8:15 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109122> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

WSJ<https://www.wsj.com/articles/tech-companies-volunteer-to-beef-up-presidential-campaigns-cybersecurity-11579770002?mod=hp_lista_pos1>:

Nearly a dozen technology companies said they will provide free or reduced-cost cybersecurity services to presidential campaigns, which experts and intelligence officials have warned are ripe targets for intrusion and disinformation.<https://www.wsj.com/articles/presidential-campaigns-remain-vulnerable-on-cybersecurity-11560448372?mod=article_inline>

They join a growing number of firms offering protection on a nonpartisan basis<https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/campaign-wire-2018-midterms/card/1537290799?mod=article_inline>, a trend that has gained steam in the past 18 months or so, since federal regulators eased rules to make such offers permissible under campaign-finance laws. The Federal Election Commission made policy changes after urging from nonprofits and technology companies, including Microsoft<https://quotes.wsj.com/MSFT> Corp.

Campaigns have struggled to make their information more secure in part because of budget pressures and the fast-moving nature of a campaign.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109122&title=%E2%80%9CTech%20Companies%20Volunteer%20to%20Beef%20Up%20Presidential%20Campaigns%E2%80%99%20Cybersecurity%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, chicanery<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=12>


Do Trump’s Earlier Efforts to Encourage Foreign Interference in U.S. Elections Justify His “Prophylactic Removal” from Office via Impeachment?<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109120>
Posted on January 23, 2020 8:12 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109120> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Ned Foley responds<https://medium.com/@Nedfoley/how-best-to-protect-2020-election-adeebdce1aa9> to some arguments from Rep. Schiff.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109120&title=Do%20Trump%E2%80%99s%20Earlier%20Efforts%20to%20Encourage%20Foreign%20Interference%20in%20U.S.%20Elections%20Justify%20His%20%E2%80%9CProphylactic%20Removal%E2%80%9D%20from%20Office%20via%20Impeachment%3F>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Resist Push for Online Ballot Box”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109118>
Posted on January 23, 2020 8:09 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109118> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Seattle Times editorial:<https://www.seattletimes.com/opinion/editorials/resist-push-for-online-ballot-box/>

The ubiquity of online life comes with devastating vulnerabilities. Even one of the world’s richest men, Jeff Bezos, is reportedly not safe<https://www.seattletimes.com/business/amazon/un-calls-for-probe-into-possible-hacking-of-bezos-phone/> from hackers of electronic devices.

Despite this well-established risk, Washington elections officials are moving in disjointed directions about internet security. In Olympia, Secretary of State Kim Wyman wants to bar emailed ballot returns because of potential fraud and network tampering via attachment. In King County, Elections Director Julie Wise is aiding a local public agency’s experiment with online voting.

The King County move is a badly flawed approach to broadening elections access. Washington’s elections must — without exception — be kept safe from online tampering. The best way to do this is to keep elections computers entirely off the internet.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109118&title=%E2%80%9CResist%20Push%20for%20Online%20Ballot%20Box%E2%80%9D>
Posted in election administration<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=18>, voting technology<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=40>


Feb. 4 Symposium on the Fair Representation Act<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109116>
Posted on January 22, 2020 2:33 pm<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109116> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Announcement<https://www.fairvote.org/a_congress_for_everyone_symposium>:

FairVote and the Election Reformers Network have teamed up to host a Symposium called, A Congress for Everyone: The Impact of the Fair Representation Act on Tuesday, February 4. It’s free and will be held at the New York University campus in Washington, DC starting at 3pm.

At a time when Americans increasingly feel like our elections are broken, a bold new proposal has been put forward that could, in the words of the New York Times editorial page, create “A Congress for Every American.” The Fair Representation Act is intended to solve our problems of partisan gerrymandering and uncompetitive elections by replacing our winner-take-all system with a fair and proportional system: ranked choice voting in multi-winner districts. Hear scholars and practitioners discuss what impact the Fair Representation Act would have on our democracy.

New York University, Washington, DC has listed detailed for the event on their website.<https://www.nyu.edu/washington-dc/nyu-washington--dc-events/a-congress-for-everyone--the-impact-of-the-fair-representation-a.html> For those who cannot attend, we will be promoting their live stream.

RSVP below to save your spot for the “A Congress for Everyone: The Impact of the Fair Representation Act symposium.”

Address:

New York University – Washington,DC Campus
Abramson Family Auditorium
1307 L Street, NW
Washington, DC 20005

Agenda:

3:00 PM Program Start
6:00 PM Reception
7:00 PM Program End

Click here to see the line-up of moderators and panelists. <https://www.fairvote.org/syposium2020_bios>
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109116&title=Feb.%204%20Symposium%20on%20the%20Fair%20Representation%20Act>
Posted in Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


“Taking Stock Of The Supreme Court’s Citizens United Decision, 10 Years Later”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109114>
Posted on January 22, 2020 11:37 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109114> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Listen to NPR’s On Point:<https://www.wbur.org/onpoint/2020/01/22/taking-stock-of-the-supreme-courts-citizens-united-decision-10-years-later>

It’s been 10 years since the Supreme Court’s landmark decision on Citizens United. We’ll look back at the last decade and take stock of the fallout.

Guests

Carrie Levine<https://publicintegrity.org/author/carrie-levine/>, senior reporter at the Center for Public Integrity. (@levinecarrie<https://twitter.com/levinecarrie?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor>)

Bradley Smith<https://law.capital.edu/Faculty/Bios/bsmith.asp>, professor of law at Capital University Law School. (@CommishSmith<https://twitter.com/CommishSmith>)

Rick Hasen<https://www.law.uci.edu/faculty/full-time/hasen/>, professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine. (@rickhasen<https://twitter.com/rickhasen?lang=en>)

John S. Adams, editor-in-chief of the Montana Free Press. (@johnsadams406<https://twitter.com/johnsadams406>)
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109114&title=%E2%80%9CTaking%20Stock%20Of%20The%20Supreme%20Court%E2%80%99s%20Citizens%20United%20Decision%2C%2010%20Years%20Later%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“How Citizens United Led Directly to Trump’s Impeachment”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109112>
Posted on January 22, 2020 11:24 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109112> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Brendan Fischer<https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/01/citizens-united-john-roberts-trump-impeachment.html> for Slate.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109112&title=%E2%80%9CHow%20Citizens%20United%20Led%20Directly%20to%20Trump%E2%80%99s%20Impeachment%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


“Citizens United turns 10 today. Here’s what we’ve learned about dark money.”<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109110>
Posted on January 22, 2020 9:03 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109110> by Rick Hasen<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=3>

Abby Wood<https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/01/21/citizens-united-turns-10-today-heres-what-weve-learned-about-dark-money/> for The Monkey Cage.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109110&title=%E2%80%9CCitizens%20United%20turns%2010%20today.%20Here%E2%80%99s%20what%20we%E2%80%99ve%20learned%20about%20dark%20money.%E2%80%9D>
Posted in campaign finance<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=10>, Supreme Court<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=29>


Citizens United and “Corporate Spending” on Elections<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109094>
Posted on January 22, 2020 8:44 am<https://electionlawblog.org/?p=109094> by Richard Pildes<https://electionlawblog.org/?author=7>

One of the important findings from yesterday’s major CFI Report on campaign finance that has gone unnoticed so far is that Citizens United did not lead to a significant increase in election spending by publicly-traded corporations. As the introduction to the report puts it:

The case did indeed increase the importance of independent expenditures. However, the much-predicted explosion in spending by large, publicly traded corporations just has not happened. This is consistent with what political scientists have known for years about the way most corporations prefer to engage in electoral politics.

As the report indicates, at the time Citizens United was decided, many of us<https://www.scotusblog.com/community/the-court%E2%80%99s-campaign-finance-jurisprudence-and-its-impact-on-the-electoral-process/> predicted that the decision would not lead to a dramatic increase in election spending from publicly-traded corporations. But you wouldn’t know this hasn’t happened from much of the public and political commentary, which conflates the dramatic increase in independent spending funded by wealthy individuals with inaccurate claims about “corporate spending” that Citizens United supposedly unleashed.
[Share]<https://www.addtoany.com/share#url=https%3A%2F%2Felectionlawblog.org%2F%3Fp%3D109094&title=Citizens%20United%20and%20%E2%80%9CCorporate%20Spending%E2%80%9D%20on%20Elections>
Posted in campaigns<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=59>, Plutocrats United<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=104>, Uncategorized<https://electionlawblog.org/?cat=1>


--
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/20200123/63769175/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/20200123/63769175/attachment.png>