The Federal Election Commission has received an advisory opinion request asking if an independent expenditure-only PAC may use incumbent members of congress in its advertisements.

Independent expenditure PAC American Crossroads has formally requested it be allowed to produce and distribute television and radio advertisements featuring on camera footage or voice-overs of incumbent members of congress up for re-election. Conceding the purpose of the ads would be to improve the public’s perception of the congress member, the advertisements would focus on policy and legislative issues.

American Crossroads is seeking confirmation and guidance as to whether the advertisements qualify as coordinated communications, are in-kind contributions, or may limit the PAC’s ability to independently expend funds in favor of the candidate.

The advisory opinion request can be found here.

A Federal constitutional amendment allowing Congress and the states to regulate campaign finance is being introduced by U.S. Senators Tom Udall and Michael Bennett.

The amendment, a response to last year’s Supreme Court decision, Citizens United v FEC, grants Congress and the states the power to “regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind equivalents” in their laws for their respective elections.

The bill allows the government to set limits on both the amount of direct political contributions to candidates and the amount of independent expenditures that may be made in support of or in opposition to those candidates.

According to his press release, Senator Udall states, “With the Supreme Court striking down the sensible regulations Congress has passed, the only way to address the root cause of this problem is to give Congress clear authority to regulate the campaign finance system.”

The full text of the proposed amendment reads as follows:

SECTION 1. Congress shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind equivalents with respect to Federal elections, including through setting limits on:

(1) The amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, Federal office; and

(2) The amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

SECTION 2. A State shall have power to regulate the raising and spending of money and in kind equivalents with respect to State elections, including through setting limits on:

(1) The amount of contributions to candidates for nomination for election to, or for election to, State office; and

(2) The amount of expenditures that may be made by, in support of, or in opposition to such candidates.

SECTION 3. Congress shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation.

A different constitutional amendment addressing the Citizen’s United decision was introduced in September by Congressman John Conyers. Information about that amendment may be found in a prior LobbyComply post here.

A one-day special session of the Arizona Legislature was called by Governor Jan Brewer yesterday to impeach the chairwoman of the Arizona Independent Redistricting Commission.

The Senate vote to impeach Chairwoman Colleen Coyle Mathis passed with the required two thirds majority. The chairwoman, a registered independent, was ousted with a party line vote of 21 Republican senators in favor of the removal and 6 Democratic senators opposed.

Governor Brewer alleges gross misconduct by Chairwoman Mathis in her role in the independent commission, which also has two democratic members and two republican members.

Photo of the Arizona State Capitol building by 2candle on Wikipedia.

The Texas Ethics Commission has adopted amendments to its rules regarding reporting requirements under the campaign finance law.

The changes in administrative rules §§20.50, 20.62, 20.219, 20.279, 20.331, and 20.433 bring them in line with Senate Bill 1, passed earlier this year.

While the bill became effective September 28, the Ethics Commission’s adopted rules became effective today.

Political contribution limit changes proposed this summer by the Montana Office of the Commissioner of Political Practices take effect today.

The adjustments affect the amount of contributions individuals, political parties, and political committees may make to candidates for the office of governor and other statewide positions.

Additionally, as also proposed this summer by the Commissioner’s office, electronic filing of reports is scheduled to begin in January.

A court in British Columbia has ruled the province cannot restrict election spending in the 60 days leading up to an official election call.

In British Columbia Teachers’ Federation v. British Columbia (Attorney General), the British Columbia Court of Appeal panel upheld a lower court ruling finding portions of Election Act sections 235.1 and 228 are unconstitutional, and are of no force and effect insofar as they relate to the pre-campaign period as defined in the Act. Therefore, the court affirmed the British Columbia Attorney General cannot restrict election spending in the pre-campaign period 60 days before the election period begins.

Election advertising preceding a 28-day campaign period is considered a “pre-campaign” period. In the decision Justice Catherine Anne Ryan wrote, “[R]estricting third-party advertising during the pre-campaign period would unjustifiably interfere with third parties’ issue advocacy, lobbying activity, and other advertising endeavours unrelated to the election.”

Individuals with federal contracts should be allowed to make political contributions to federal candidates or political parties, a lawsuit filed yesterday by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) argues.

The suit, Wagner v. Federal Election Commission, filed in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, challenges the constitutionality of section 441c of Title 2 of the U.S. Code, which prohibits any vendors with contracts with the federal government from making such contributions.

According to its press release, the ACLU is asking the Court, on behalf of the three named plaintiffs, to declare the law unconstitutional as applied to individuals who have personal services contracts with federal agencies. Because federal workers who are not contractors may make federal political contributions, while contractors performing the same work may not, the suit argues section 441c violates both the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution and the First Amendment.

Photo of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia courtesy of the Court’s website.

A proposed federal regulation would require mandatory privacy training for certain contractors.

Under a new rule put forward by the Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and NASA, contractors would be required to identify employees designing, operating or having access to government systems of records, or handling personally identifiable information.

This training would be required upon the award of a contract and at least annually thereafter. Vendors would be required to maintain records of employee training for request by the government.

This rule does not apply to commercial items. The Regulatory Secretariat is accepting comments until December 13.

The Rhode Island General Assembly is scheduled to meet tomorrow, October 18. Tomorrow’s legislative purpose concerns changes to the public pension system.

Because the Legislature has technically only been in recess, the meeting is not a special session. The Legislature will meet intermittently throughout this fall.

Photo of the Rhode Island State Capitol by Garrett A. Wollman on Wikipedia.

Today’s scheduled House Subcommittee hearing with the FEC’s Commissioners has been postponed.

The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Elections has not yet chosen a new date for the hearing.

All six Commissioners from the Federal Election Commission (FEC) are slated to appear before a House Subcommittee tomorrow at 3pm.

The Committee on House Administration’s Subcommittee on Elections has designated the scheduled meeting “Federal Election Commission: Reviewing Policies, Processes and Procedures.”

Among its other election-related duties, the Subcommittee on Elections oversees the FEC.

The Sunset Commission, a legislative body created by the Texas Legislature to identify and eliminate waste, duplication, and inefficiency in government agencies, will seek public input during its scheduled review of the Texas Ethics Commission.

During the evaluation of the Ethics Commission’s mission and performance, submitted comments and suggestions will be accepted until the suggested date of November 21. The Sunset Commission then anticipates it will issue a report in March 2012 followed by a public hearing with testimony in April.

Based on the public input and the report, any recommendations to the legislature will be submitted at the start of its next session in January 2013.

Some of the duties the Texas Ethics Commission administers and enforces are the election code concerning political contributions, expenditures and political advertising, and lobbying registration, reports and activities.

The announcement of the review can be found here.

Photo of the Texas State Capitol by LoneStarMike on Wikipedia.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) is soliciting comments for possible regulations concerning exceptions to its rules regarding disclaimers on internet communications, hoping to glean insights to keep pace with the rapidly evolving technological advances available to practitioners of campaign finance.

In its draft Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the FEC invites comments addressing the ways that campaigns, political committees, and others use or may soon use the internet, mobile devices, and other technologies to disseminate and receive campaign and other electoral information. The Commission is also interested in possible modifications and technological alternatives to the current disclaimer requirements, and data or experiences “in purchasing, selling, or distributing small or character-limited advertisements online.”

The FEC anticipates any final rules would not become effective until after the 2011-2012 election cycle.

The Federal Election Commission (FEC) will no longer prohibit nonconnected political committees from accepting corporate and labor organization contributions, provided the political committee maintains and deposits those contributions into separate bank accounts.

The Commission will also not limit the amounts permissible sources can contribute to such accounts.

In an statement released by the FEC, it stated, consistent with its agreement to a stipulated order and consent judgment in Carey v. FEC, it would no longer enforce 2 U.S.C. §§ 441a(a)(1)(C) and 441a(a)(3), as well as any implementing regulations, against any nonconnected political committee with regard to contributions from individuals, political committees, corporations, and labor organizations under certain conditions.

A single committee may now contribute directly to candidates and political committees, and make independent expenditures, separating the funds only by using two separate bank accounts. The committee must maintain the statutory limits on the solicitation of funds used for direct contributions while it may simultaneously seek unlimited funds for use in their independent expenditures.

The FEC intends to develop new regulations and amend its reporting forms. Until that time, the Commission says committees should follow the procedures the FEC outlines in its current statement, which is located here.

This post follows up  previous articles by George Ticoras, “FEC Agrees Not to Enforce Some Laws Against NDPAC” and “One PAC Is Enough.”