Subject: Re: [EL] disclosure and the Chamber
From: Steve Klein
Date: 10/8/2010, 4:46 PM
To: "rick.hasen@lls.edu" <rick.hasen@lls.edu>
CC: Election Law <election-law@mailman.lls.edu>

Re the SWP: There's nothing like establishing a record of gov't harrassment before you have the First Amendment to fall back on. What counts for gov't harassment these days? I would think a random audit based on the sole fact that an association is engaged in political activity meets the definition.

Do you have a definition of "large scale political activities," or will the IRS/FEC just know it when it sees it? I suspect once the regulators get involved, many will be very surprised how small a large scale operation can get.

As discussed earlier, does the policy of the FEC only disclosing small donor information to the public if it finds wrongdoing by said association attenuate the chill for small donors? I think not.

Steve Klein
Wyoming Liberty Group
www.wyliberty.org

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:28 PM, Rick Hasen <hasenr@gmail.com> wrote:
 I don't know that the debate has "moved," but I've believed in the
idea of random audits of those engaged in large scale political
activities (again, with the information disclosed only to the gov't
agency, and not to the public), since I saw Republican concern voiced
about the Obama donations in 2008 and whether they could include
improper source donations in amounts the campaign reported as under $200
per individual contribution.  This audit requirement would be subject to
as-applied exemptions for groups like the Socialist Workers' Party, who
can show a record of gov't/other harassment.

Rick



On 10/8/2010 4:24 PM, sparnell@campaignfreedom.org wrote:
> Am I reading you correctly, Rick, that the debate has moved beyond the idea that donations/revenue to groups engaging in political speech should generally be disclosed, and that audits of groups engaged in political speech should be the new norm?
>
> I'm kind of hoping I misread that.
>
> Sean
>
>
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless BlackBerry
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rick Hasen<hasenr@gmail.com>
> Sender: election-law-bounces@mailman.lls.edu
> Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 12:36:26
> To: Allison Hayward Gmail<allisonhayward@gmail.com>
> Reply-To: rick.hasen@lls.edu
> Cc: 'Election Law'<election-law@mailman.lls.edu>
> Subject: Re: [EL] disclosure and the Chamber
>
> _______________________________________________
> election-law mailing list
> election-law@mailman.lls.edu
> http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law
>

--
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


_______________________________________________
election-law mailing list
election-law@mailman.lls.edu
http://mailman.lls.edu/mailman/listinfo/election-law