The real story of the impact of BCRA on political parties and interest
groups is yet to be determined. Roy seems oblivious to the thoughtful
work on this subject done by the Campaign Finance Institute in Life
After Reform: When the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act Meets Politics.
He also fails to grapple with the arguments in the amicus brief
submitted by leading scholars of political parties. And then there is
that annoying fact that the national party committees have raised more
hard money in this post-BCRA cycle than they raised in hard and soft
money together at a comparable point in the last presidential election
cycle. It appears parties adapt to new realities better than scholars.
A little less hyperbole about BCRA and a little more research is
merited.
Roy Schotland <schotlan@law.georgetown.edu> 10/31/03 11:03AM >>>
Ed sends info that I find always interesting, very often valuable.
Today he puts a question (or not truly a question?) that I find more
than surprising.
On "How BCRA decentralizes politics", he says-- "OK, power has
moved away from the DNC, but has it just shifted to other big players?"
Whether one sees BCRA as a step forward or instead (as I do) the
worst law ever for our political scene (well, I know little about the
Alien & Sedition Acts), hasn't it been clear as can be that BCRA doesn't
stop the flow of funds but rather --like other steps that began in
1974-- shifts the flows, putting parties lower than ever?
But query whether it "decentralizes"-- an honest question, not
argument: The six national party committees are hurt and non-party
groups helped, indeed they're invited to blossom (does anyone still use
the line "let a thousand flowers blossom"?) and flourish. Will the
non-party groups (taken in the aggregate) be significantly less
centralized, or more or about the same, as the national party cmtes?
roy
Ed Still wrote: How BCRA decentralizes politics... or does it?
Deep in body of an article (from the New Republic via the CBS News
site) about Howard Dean probably getting the endorsement of the Service
Employees International Union is this paragraph: SEIU's formal
endorsement this year could have similar ripple effects. It could be a
signal to the few big unions that are still on the fence, like the
American Federation of Teachers and the Communications Workers of
America, which is leaning toward Dean, that the former Vermont governor
is a legitimate candidate worth backing. It could also help Dean with
other party interest groups, since [SEIU president Andy] Stern is one of
the most influential leaders in Democratic politics. In the
post-McCain-Feingold world, much of the power of the DNC has shifted to
a collection of liberal umbrella organizations known as 527s. Stern is
at the center of three of the most important: Partnership for America's
Families, America Coming Together, and America Votes, which together
will spend tens -- and maybe hundreds -- of millions of dollars next
year to beat President Bush. Dean could not have found a more powerful
ally to help him build the institutional support he now needs.
OK, power has moved away from the DNC, but has it just shifted to other
big players?
This entry was posted by votelaw at 07:51 PM
Ag Commissioner going for a ride, but not at the fairAP reports, Former
state Agriculture Commissioner Meg Scott Phipps was convicted Thursday
of perjury and obstruction of justice, and will spend time in jail while
awaiting sentencing.
Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens ordered Phipps held in the Wake
County jail until a Nov. 12 sentencing hearing. He refused a request
from Phipps' attorneys to reconsider his decision, but could consider
future motions to release her on bail.
The jury found Phipps guilty of four of five charges: perjury, aiding
and abetting perjury, obstruction of justice and conspiracy to obstruct
justice. Jurors acquitted her on a single count of suborning perjury.
Witnesses testified that Phipps lied to cover up unreported cash
campaign contributions and illegal payments her campaign made to help
repay the campaign debt of one-time political rival and former aide
Bobby McLamb.
The contributions came from carnival vendors interested in winning
contracts to do business at the N.C. State Fair.
This entry was posted by votelaw at 07:40 PM
Arizona IRC may get some $The Arizona Daily Sun reports, A House
panel took the first steps Wednesday to giving some money to the
Independent Redistricting Commission to defend the congressional and
legislative boundaries it crafted. On a 10-3 margin the House
Appropriations Committee voted to give the commission $1.7 million. The
measure now goes to the full House.
That is far less than the $4.2 million that commission Chairman Steve
Lynn said may eventually be necessary on top of the $6 million it
already has spent.
But Lynn said it should at least pay for the costs of the lawsuit and
a likely appeal.
The need for legislative action -- and quickly -- became more
apparent as the Arizona Supreme Court on Wednesday refused to even
consider whether the commission is entitled automatically to more
money.
Without comment the justices brushed aside arguments by Hauser that
because the commission is given duties in the state Constitution it
cannot be hobbled by the failure of the Legislature or governor to
provide the funds.
(Disclosure: I represent the plaintiffs in the suit against the
Independent Redistricting Commission over its Congressional plan.)
This entry was posted by votelaw at 01:29 PM
Edward Still
attorney & mediator
Suite 201
2112 11th Avenue South <== note new address & phone number
Birmingham AL 35205
phone 205-320-2882
fax toll free 1-877-264-5513
still@votelaw.com
http://www.votelaw.com
http://www.votelaw.com/blog
VEdward Stillattorney and mediatorSuite 2012112 11th Ave S.Birmingham
AL 35205 phone 205-320-2882 fax toll free 1-877-264-5513
still@votelaw.com http://www.votelaw.com
http://www.votelaw.com/blog--
Roy A. Schotland
Professor
Georgetown U. Law Ctr.
600 New Jersey Ave. N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20001
phone 202/662-9098
fax 662-9680 or -9444