Subject: news of the day 5/30/04 |
From: Rick Hasen |
Date: 5/30/2004, 9:39 AM |
To: election-law |
Back in this post, I linked to a New York Times story in which Democracy 21's Fred Wertheimer was quoted as saying that FEC Chair Brad Smith "was acting out of principle, too" in failing to go along with new regulations of 527 organizations.
Today, Werthheimer has this letter to the editor in which he retracts his earlier statement: Smith's vote "not a real act of principle but rather a failure to properly enforce the campaign finance laws he has sworn to uphold."
In my view, Wertheimer had it right the first time and went too far the second time. The 527 issue, as readers of this blog know, raises complex statutory and constitutional questions. Brad Smith resolved the 527 issue against regulation, taking a respectable position on the issue that is certainly in line with his own ideology not to reach out and do more than the Supreme Court and Congress have required. It is the same position taken by other members of the FEC, and it is a position that put Smith, a Republican, at odds with the RNC and others.
Back when Smith was up for nomination to the FEC, I took a position against his nomination. I agreed with others that Smith is honest and a person of principle, but thought his ideological position should disqualify him from the job. (I believe we had a debate on the listserv over whether ideology should be relevant for nomination to the FEC.)
The Werheimer statement shows how personal and bitter the campaign
finance debate has become in Washington. It should still be possible to
take a position on a campaign finance issue contrary to others without
having one's personal integrity attacked.
The New York Times offers a
report on the latest fundraising controversies.
Tom Campbell offers this
Los Angeles Times commentary.
The Los Angeles Times offers this
report,
with the following subhead: "The 30-year-old state ethics watchdog
agency, which is looking into the governor's use of campaign funds, is
targeted for reductions."
The Washington Post offers this
report.
Following up on this post,
you can find additional coverage of this trial here,
here,
here,
here,
here,
and here.
-- Rick Hasen Professor of Law and William M. Rains Fellow Loyola Law School 919 South Albany Street Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211 (213)736-1466 (213)380-3769 - fax rick.hasen@lls.edu http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html http://electionlawblog.org