Florida: “Senate committee finalizes redistricting maps as Democrats split” Mary Ellen Klas in the Miami Herald.

“Democrats prepare for partisan redistricting debate” by Aaron Deslatte in the Orlando Sentinel.

Kentucky: “Panel approves state House redistricting plan over Republican protests” by Jack Brammer in the Lexington Herald-Leader.

North Carolina: “N.C. lawyers want redistricting challenges dismissed“by The Associated Press in the Greensboro News & Record.

Texas:“Republicans say Texas may need to hold two primaries” by Aman Batheja in the Star-Telegram.

“More Confusion in Redistricting Case” by Richard Whittaker in The Austin Chronicle.

West Virginia: “W.Va. redistricting deadline lifted, but election calendar looms” by Lawrence Messina (Associated Press) in the Charleston Gazette.

The Ethics Resource Center reports in a new study that four times as many employees of large corporations have seen illegal donations given to public officials.

According to an article in today’s edition of Politico: “Four percent of 4,600 private-sector employees surveyed this fall by the Ethics Resource Center said they witnessed improper contributions to campaigns and parties. By comparison, only 1 percent of respondents reported these transgressions in the group’s previous study, completed in 2009.”

For the full story, read “Ethics Study: More Employees Report Seeing Illegal Donations” by Janie Lorber in Politico.

Electronic filing for lobbyist reports will be available beginning with the report due February 15, 2012 covering the month of January 2012.

You can read the press release from the Office of the Secretary of State here.

Take a look at this news item on NCSL’s blog, The Thicket: “TVW Introduces SCOUT” by Jan Goehring.

According to the post: “TVW, the Washington state public affairs network, is offering an innovative service to citizens who want to follow public policy issues and the legislative process. This new tool, called SCOUT, allows the public to easily keep track of issues. SCOUT will track video and bill information and automatically send it to those who open a free account.”

You can find the link to TVW here, and find out more about SCOUT at this link.

Photo of the Washington State Capitol dome by Tradnor on Wikipedia.

NEW MEXICO: The federal district court in Albuquerque has issued a preliminary injunction against enforcement of state limits on financial contributions to be used in federal campaigns and for independent expenditures in state races.

The contribution-limits law, which took effect at the conclusion of the 2010 election cycle, limits contributions to non-statewide candidates for office to $2,300 per election from any entity except a political committee, which can give $5,000 to non-statewide candidates. It limits contributions to statewide candidates for office, political action committees and political parties to $5,000 per election from individuals and groups.

The preliminary injunction is not a definitive ruling tossing any of the limits, but it is a temporary stay against the enforcement of non-statewide and independent expenditure limits based on findings that the plaintiffs were likely to be successful in their challenge to those limits, that they faced irreparable damage if the injunction wasn’t granted, and that the injunction serves the public interest.

The injunction was widely anticipated in light of the U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Citizens United. Limits on contributions to candidates for state office and to groups intending to spend money on state races in coordination with candidates remain in place.

The stories take a look at We the People, the White House online petition platform and Data.gov, the site that offers raw, readable government data sets for use by the public.

• “Fewer online petitions posted to We the People website” by Joseph Marks on Nextgov.com.

• “Most Data.gov apps are built by government, not the public” by  Joseph Marks on Nextgov.com.

On Monday a bill passed the New Jersey Senate that would prohibit political fundraising by any candidate on any public property in the state.

The legislation has gone to the Assembly and if it is passed, it would have to be signed by Governor Chris Christie.

You can find the story in the article “N.J. Senate passes bill banning political fundraising on all public property” by Christopher Baxter in the Star-Ledger.

With text ads, graphics ads, and even YouTube videos at their disposal, SuperPACs have a powerful tool with Google’s AdWords’ search-based advertising platform as a way to get their messages out.

This article on techPresident explores how Google is gearing up for big ad sales and what this may mean for the 2012 election cycle. Be sure to read “Google’s Preparing for Super PAC Spending Online in 2012” by Sarah Lai Stirland.

The Charter Review Commission for the city of Stamford, Connecticut is considering whether changes should be made in order to mandate a city ethics code. Local officials are considering whether to institute a requirement for an ethics code into the city charter, revised only once every ten years, or by ordinance.

If an ethics code is mandated into the city charter, some commission members worry repealing or altering it could become a burdensome task due to the required approval by Stamford residents through voter referendum. In contrast, an ordinance requiring a code of ethics could be changed as necessary by Stamford officials.

The Commission will be holding several meetings to allow public comments concerning the situation prior to making any decision.

The Washington House of Representatives, Committee on State Government and Tribal Affairs, has scheduled a public hearing for January 11, 2012 and a possible executive session for January 12, 2012 to discuss House Bill 1474 which would make electronic filing of lobbying reports mandatory.

It would also create new fees associated with electronic filings by lobbyists, lobbyist employers, and PACs.

If passed by both chambers and signed by the governor, changes will be effective July 1, 2012.

Photo of the Washington House of Representatives Chamber by Cacophony on Wikipedia.

The practical result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s January 21, 2010, Citizens United decision allows corporations, labor unions, and others to make independent expenditures and electioneering communications regarding candidates without restrictions.

We are approaching the second anniversary of Citizens United. We said at the time of the decision the biggest impact would come when states chose to react – or not react – to the decision. We have tracked what the states are doing – whether the state has passed new laws, clarified existing laws, or has bills pending.

Be sure to take a look at the essential and up-to-date report we have made available on our website regarding how the states are reacting to Citizens United.

Just in time for the second anniversary of the Citizens United decision by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Sunlight Foundation is crafting a bill that would require disclosure of the money behind independent expenditures, SuperPACs, and more. Called the Stop Undisclosed Payments in Elections from Ruining Public Accountability in Campaigns Act, the text of the bill (in its current form) can be found here.

According to the announcement on their website, the SUPERPAC Act would require the following:

• Ensure disclosure of donors who fund independent expenditures and electioneering communications made by Super PACs or other 501(c) organizations. Donors giving to an organization for other purposes may remain anonymous if the organization establishes separate accounts for non-election related spending.

• Require real-time, online disclosure of all reports. Data must be in searchable, sortable, machine-readable formats and reports must include unique IDs for all filers.

• Require disclaimers (stand-by-your-ad statements) and identification of top funders in the ad.

• Require registered lobbyists to report their spending on independent expenditures and electioneering communications.

• Require all candidates and committees to file electronically with the Federal Election Commission.

The organization is encouraging input from the public in order to improve the proposed legislation via publicmarkup.org.

Be sure to read “Campaign-finance regulations go before high court” by Peter Wong in the Statesman Journal.

According to the article: “Justices of the Oregon Supreme Court are pondering whether the state should enforce campaign-finance regulations that Oregon voters approved in 2006 despite their rejection of a companion constitutional change in the same election. … Measure 47 would have limited individual contributions — to $500 in statewide contests and $100 in all others — and barred corporate and union contributions. It also would have set limits on contributions to all types of political committees.”

Photo of the Oregon Supreme Court courtroom doors by Aboutmovies on Wikipedia.