December 13, 2010 •
RNC Argues for Coordinated Campaign Spending
Appeal filed by James Bopp
The Republican National Committee has filed a petition for a writ of certiorari with the Supreme Court challenging limits on the amounts a political party can spend in coordination with candidates. Filed on the RNC’s behalf by James Bopp, Jr., the RNC argues the expenditures constitute the party’s free speech.
RNC Chairman Michael Steele said, “The right of political parties to express their members’ views about their candidates for office while also working directly with those candidates to help elect them is crucial to a healthy democracy.”
The case being appealed, Cao v. FEC, found contribution limits constitutional as applied to the RNC.
December 10, 2010 •
CFTC Derives Ban on Campaign Contributions
Public Comment Sought
The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission has proposed a ban on political contributions from banks which arrange derivative trading with federal, public, and municipal agencies. The banks would be prohibited from making campaign donations to public officials who have the power to award work to the banks.
The commission voted unanimously to seek public comment on December 16 with the view to complete the regulations by 2011.
December 9, 2010 •
News You Can Use from the MSRB
The regulatory board releases a statement regarding municipal entities and advisors who have made political contributions.
Following a recent meeting, the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board issued a request for comment on a rule regulating the business activities of municipal advisors with municipal entities when they have made political contributions to officials responsible for awarding that business.
You can read the press release from the MSRB here.
December 9, 2010 •
Dealing with New Jersey’s “Wheeling”
Senator Weinberg Offers Legislation For Governor Christie’s Tool Kit
State Senator Loretta Weinberg has proposed legislation to end loopholes in the New Jersey pay-to-play laws and to end “wheeling”, the channeling of money through different political committees to avoid contribution limits. “This new bill will give us the iron-clad restrictions against the practice of using campaign cash to influence decision-makers that has unfortunately become business as usual in the Garden State,” said Weinberg.
Additionally, county and municipal political parties would be banned from donating to each other and limited to donating $25,000 to state parties. County parties would only be allowed to donate to local parties within their jurisdiction. Senator Weinberg would like her pay-to-play reform added as a part of Governor Christie’s municipal and county “tool kit”, but has not received any response from the Governor.
Photo of Sen. Loretta Weinberg by Bbsrock on Wikipedia.
December 9, 2010 •
Missouri Bank Fights New Ethics Law
Bank Challenges Missouri SB 844’s Limits on Political Contributions; Bill Sponsor Seeks Change in Law
Legends Bank is seeking to block enforcement of Missouri’s new ethics law, found in Senate Bill 844, which took effect August 28. Legends Bank and its president filed suit Monday in Cole County Circuit Court citing language that limits the bank’s right to make political donations. Senate Bill 844 sought to limit politicians’ ability to conceal the source of money by moving it through several political action committees.
Legends Bank claims that in determining which individuals and entities can donate to political action committees, lawmakers appear to have limited the ability of state-chartered banks to donate. Republican Senate president pro-tem Charlie Shields, who sponsored Senate Bill 844, stated to the St. Louis Post-Dispatch the goal of the bill was never to stop banks or corporations from making political donations and that the disputed language should be fairly easy to fix.
Photo of the Missouri Capitol by RebelAt of English Wikipedia.
December 9, 2010 •
What are the “Magic Words?”
Colorado Supreme Court to Make Decision in Regards to Campaign Finance
The Colorado Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case brought by Colorado Ethics Watch concerning the so-called “magic words” required of political ads. Colorado Ethics Watch filed the complaint against Senate Majority Fund and Colorado Leadership Fund after the two 527 political organizations ran campaign ads supporting state legislative candidates in the 2008 election but did not register as political committees or submit independent expenditure disclosures for the ads.
An Administrative Law Judge determined, and the Colorado Court of Appeals agreed, registration and reporting were not required because the ads did not contain terms such as “vote for” or “defeat.” It is expected the case will be briefed in early 2011, with oral arguments taking place in the spring.
Seal of the State of Colorado by Svgalbertian on Wikipedia.
December 2, 2010 •
Wisconsin Supreme Court to Hear Campaign Finance Case
The Wisconsin Supreme Court will hear a case regarding a campaign finance rule amendment requiring groups to disclose the source of funding for political advertisements made prior to elections.
At the heart of the controversy is the Government Accountability Board’s (G.A.B.) rule which took effect August 1, 2010. The rule says advertisements broadcast in the weeks before an election must disclose their funding sources even if they do not expressly advocate a vote for or against a party or candidate.
Prior to the amendment, groups could evade disclosure requirements by running advertisements disguised as issue advocacy, so-called “phony issue ads”. Such ads were not considered political in nature as they did not contain what G.A.B. spokesperson Reid Magney calls the “magic words”: specific calls for viewers to vote for, elect, or approve a given candidate. The G.A.B.’s rule was meant close the “phony issue ad” loophole.
The Wisconsin legislature, for its part, permitted the G.A.B. rule to come into force on August 1, 2010. Since the rule’s effective date, however, groups across the state have claimed the rule infringes on their First Amendment rights to free speech. Several lawsuits, including two in federal court, have been filed challenging the rule’s constitutionality.
The judges in both federal cases have stayed the suits filed in their courts pending a resolution in the state case. Oral arguments begin in the Wisconsin Supreme Court on March 9, 2011.
December 2, 2010 •
Developers’ Donations in Maryland Target for Legislation
Shared Campaign Accounts Are Issue
Maryland General Assembly Delegate Justin Ross will introduce legislation requiring local officials to recuse themselves from voting on building projects if a developer contributed to a shared campaign account affiliated with the official.
Presently, local leaders may vote on land use projects while indirectly receiving political contribution from these developers through accounts shared with General Assembly candidates.
In addition to the officials recusing themselves, developers would have to provide detailed information about all contributions to individual and shared accounts when they are requesting a land use decision from a council.
November 29, 2010 •
Supreme Court to Consider Arizona Campaign Finance Regulations Again
US Supreme Court to Determine Constitutionality of Arizona’s Clean Elections Campaign Finance Law
The United States Supreme Court will again review Arizona’s attempt to level the playing field for political candidates, agreeing to determine the constitutionality of Arizona’s law to distribute campaign subsidies to publicly funded candidates who face big-spending opponents.
In June, the Supreme Court blocked a portion of Arizona’s Clean Elections program, which authorized the state to provide “matching funds” to those candidates who face opponents spending large amounts of their own money or outside groups that target them. The court combined two cases, Arizona Free Enterprise, et al v. Bennett and McComish v. Bennett, and will hear arguments in the spring of 2011.
Picture of the U.S. Supreme Court by UpstateNYer on Wikipedia.
November 29, 2010 •
Campaign Finance News from Canada
Quebec Government Seeking to Alter Campaign Finance Law
The province of Quebec is seeking to make alterations to campaign finance law in an effort to reduce fraud and restore the confidence of the public in how political parties are financed. Quebec’s government will follow the recommendations of the province’s Chief Electoral Officer and will make amendments to Assembly Bill 113.
In present form, Bill 113 seeks to prevent companies from making contributions to political parties in the names of employees. However, the bill will be amended to permit voters to make annual contributions of a maximum $1,000, reduced from $3,000, to political parties and candidates, and require all contribution checks to first pass through the province’s Chief Electoral Officer, who will then distribute the money to the designated political party or candidate. Further, names of all donors would be made public, a break from current law which requires only the names of those contributing in excess of $200 be publicly available.
Supporters of the measure are touting this as the first major reform in financing Quebec’s political parties since 1977. The provisions of the bill are expected to be adopted prior to the end of the Assembly’s Fall session.
Image of the coat of arms of the Province of Quebec by Jérôme BLUM on Wikipedia.
November 24, 2010 •
Montana Political Finance Regulations Challenged
Political Groups Seek to Invalidate Several Campaign Finance Laws and Challenge the Authority of the Office of Political Practices
Western Tradition Partnership and the Montana Citizens for Right to Work have filed suit challenging several Montana campaign finance laws that impose “onerous and constitutional burdens upon (those) engaged in political speech.” The suit seeks to exempt the two groups from campaign finance laws and further investigation by the state, but also claims the Office of Political Practices’ entire investigative process is unconstitutional.
Montana Political Practices Commissioner Dennis Unsworth ruled October 21 that Western Tradition Partnership is a political committee and had violated state law by failing to report campaign-related spending or its donors. The groups maintained in their complaint that they engage in “issue advocacy” communication and are not subject to Montana’s political committee laws, and that the laws themselves are unconstitutionally vague.
November 23, 2010 •
Massachusetts OCPF Reminds Municipal Candidates of 2011 Filing Requirements
The Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF) has released its Fall 2010 newsletter.
Included in the newsletter is guidance detailing the new requirement for mayoral candidates in cities with population sizes between 40,000 and 100,000 persons to file electronically with OCPF rather than with local elections officers. Starting this coming January with the year-end report due on January 20, 2011, mayoral candidates are required to file with OCPF if they anticipate raising or spending $5,000 or more during an election cycle. During election years, mayoral candidates will file three reports with OCPFL: the pre-primary, pre-election and year end reports. In non-election years, candidates will only file a year-end report.
According to recent census figures, candidates in 23 Massachusetts cities are affected by the new requirement. The largest of these cities are Quincy, New Bedford, Fall River and Brockton. Mayoral candidates in Boston, Lowell, Worcester, Springfield, and Cambridge already file their reports with OCPF.
Other changes to state law will require Internet disclosure for all municipal candidates who raise or spend $1,000 or more during a reporting period. The paper reports for candidates for city council, selectmen, school committee candidates, and local ballot question committees will now be posted to municipal websites by local election officials. The OCPF newsletter may be found here.
Photo of Boston by Riptor3000 on Wikipedia.
November 23, 2010 •
Alabama Utilities Regulators Announce New Restrictions on Gifts and Campaign Contributions
Alabama utilities commissioners turn out the lights on gifts and contributions from lobbyists.
The state’s Public Services Commission approved new ethics rules last week by a 3-0 vote of the commissioners. These regulations prohibit a commission employee from soliciting or accepting a gift or campaign contribution from a lobbyist representing an industry regulated by the commission.
The new rules took effect immediately upon approval by the commissioners. The Public Services Commission regulates public utilities and telecommunications providers in Alabama.
Map of Alabama by JimIrwin on Wikipedia.
November 22, 2010 •
$5,000 Contribution Limit Upheld
District Court Finds Law Constitutional
A District Court has issued a judgment upholding $5,000 limits on party contributions to candidates.
In Cao v. FEC, the District Court Eastern District of Louisiana, following a prior judgment from the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on other grounds, found 2 U.S.C. §441a(a)(2)(A) constitutional even though it imposes the same contribution limits on parties as on PACs and the limits are not adjusted for inflation.
The suit had been brought by Louisiana Congressman Anh “Joseph” Cao, the Republican National Committee and the Republican Party of Louisiana.
State and Federal Communications, Inc. provides research and consulting services for government relations professionals on lobbying laws, procurement lobbying laws, political contribution laws in the United States and Canada. Learn more by visiting stateandfed.com.