Supreme Court Denies Cert. in Case Involving Campaign Contributions to Judges

Lyle Denniston reports: "Among the cases denied review on Monday was an attempt to assert a constitutional claim when an elected state judge declines to withdraw from deciding a case that involves the interest of individuals or groups that contributed campaign money to that judge. The case raised a due process issue, not an ethical question, about the failure of an Illinois Supreme Court justice to take himself out of a case reviewing a massive verdict against State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. The state Supreme Court, with Justice Lloyd Karmeier participating, reversed a $456.7 million award againt the auto insurer on a breach of contract claim. The case was Avery v. State Farm (05-842)." Here is the orderl list.

"Publicly Funded Pipe Dreams?

Eliza Newlin Carney offers this National Journal column (free access). A snippet: "The obvious reason that public financing is back in vogue is that it;s tough to talk about cleaning up the Washington ethics mess while ignoring political money. It's all well and good to curtail lobbyist-funded meals and trips, say many on Capitol Hill, but let's not ignore the hundreds of thousands of dollars in campaign cash that lobbyists raise for candidates."

"The Trouble with Texas"

Stuart Taylor offers this National Journal column (free access) on the Texas redistricting case. It ends:

Perhaps you, dear reader, can clearly discern from all this what would be the fairest outcome. But I have given up. And most of the justices seemed content to leave bad enough alone. They also seemed likely to reject most or all of the Democrats' claims that this or that district had too few or too many voters of this or that race.

Whatever the outcome, it would be nice if the justices could tidy up a bit -- bringing a dollop of clarity to their rules, loosening the one-person, one-vote straitjacket, reducing the pressure to draw minority-controlled districts even in places where minority candidates have a fair shot without such manipulations.

But it's hard to imagine the justices inventing a new right to more-competitive districts, or where in the Constitution they could find it.

"An Office of Public Integrity: A Solution in Search of a Problem"

Senator George Voinovich has written this Guest Observer column for Roll Call (paid subscription required). It begins: "As a Member of the Senate, and for the past three years as chairman of the Senate Ethics Committee, I strongly support lobbying reforms that protect the integrity of our legislative process and promote moral and ethical behavior. I commend the bipartisan efforts of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs and Rules committees, as well as members of our leadership, for their hard work in developing comprehensive lobbying reform legislation. While developing the lobbying reform package, some Members, individuals and groups have supported the creation of an Office of Public Integrity to respond to the recent scandals filling the evening news and daily newspapers. Unfortunately, this proposal offers a solution in search of a problem."

"Brown to Repay State Committees"

Roll Call offers this report (paid subscription required), which begins: "Rhode Island Secretary of State Matt Brown (D) said Friday that he would return controversial contributions his Senate campaign received from three state Democratic parties last year, after questions were raised about whether the donations were part of an attempt to skirt campaign finance laws. even as he announced he would send the money back, Brown defended the donations as 'completely legal and fully disclosed' to the Federal Election Commission."

"Term limits, timing, dominance catch up with GOP"

AP offers this report from Ohio.

"SMALL DONORS, ONLINE DONORS AND FIRST-TIMERS"

See this press release, which begins:

WASHINGTON -- The 2004 election was a watershed in presidential campaign fundraising. Three or four times as many people contributed to the candidates in 2004 as in 2000, including an unprecedented number of small donors and Internet donors.
A report released today by the Institute for Politics, Democracy & the Internet (IPDI) and the Campaign Finance Institute (CFI) looks at this surge of contributors. More than 1,500 donors were surveyed and three dozen interviewed at length for Small Donors and Online Giving: A Study of Donors to the 2004 Presidential Campaigns.

The report is here and a Washington Post story is here.

"Senate system drags out financial-data disclosure; Lawmakers go through laborious process rather than file campaign info electronically"

USA Today offers this report.

"Keep Legislators, Redistricting Apart"

The Atlanta Journal Constitution offers this interesting oped on Georgia's re-redistricting.

"Free the Blogosphere"

Brian Anderson offers this column in the Dallas Morning News. Along similar lines, Patrick McIlheran writes It's not reform if it translates as 'shut up' .

"Vt. City Electing Mayor Via Instant Runoff"

AP offers this report.

Broder on Republicans and the Vermont and Texas Cases

See this Washington Post column.

-- 
Rick Hasen
William H. Hannon Distinguished Professor of Law
Loyola Law School
919 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