Answering Hasen and CCP, on ALPRick Hasen wants to hear from me about the reason why the Obama campaign has not renewed its complaint against the American Leadership Project, a 527 that drew a complaint when spending on behalf of Hillary Clinton and that is now on the loose, so far unchallenged, against John McCain. The Center for Competitive Politics started this, raising the question, and it uses the occasion to make its case that the law is used—abused—as an “electoral sword.”
(9/5/08) Read More In Arizona: A Decision on Public Financing and the Question of “Gamesmanship”McComish v. Brewer, holding that the Arizona public financing statute is unconstitutional, demonstrates the effect of the Supreme Court’s Davis decision. Public financing supporters prophesize doom: they are sure the Court meant to hex all public financing laws and that lower courts, like the McComish court, have heard the message, loudly and clearly. This one way the argument can run—call it the “end of the world” argument. But there are other ways.
(9/4/08) Read More Allison Hayward Tries to ExplainHer Defense of the AIP, in the Weekly Standard Allison Hayward knows a good deal about election law, and she writes with verve and wit, making good entertainment of what is often the dreariest subjects. In the Weekly Standard, she turns these talents to the task of defending the American Issues Project and its financier Harold Simmons.
(9/3/08) Read More More from CCP on (Against) Public FinancingCCP continues its hard questioning of the public financing system. In its latest white paper, it challenges the assumption that female candidates for public office, having less access to political money networks, will benefit from public funding alternatives. It studies Maine and Arizona and concludes that the women did not capture a larger share of state elected offices after public funds became available. CCP argues, in fact, that women politicians in those states experienced on average a “slight” decline in political market share.
(9/2/08) Read More Vice PresidentA topic in election law, timely as the morning news: Sandy Levinson puts sharply the question of why we would abide the selection of the Vice President in the currently accepted form. A Presidential nominee makes the pick, and it is the nominee's choice alone: and if anything is said for this procedure, it is advanced as a test of Presidential judgment. Once made, it is not easily undone: the President (as, as a practical matter) cannot dismiss the Vice President, but the Congress, having had no role in the selection, can impeach this second highest officer in the land.
(9/1/08) Read More Also...McCain and Attack Ads 8/27/08 Bye Bye to the Gift Bag 8/26/08 The Right to Vote in a Change Election 8/25/08 At the Commission Today: A Question of What Can Be Said to the Voters 8/21/08 Developments as the Federal Election Commission Prepares to Consider the McCain Case 8/20/08 The Research Battle in the Reform War 8/19/08 The McCain Matching Fund Case: Part Two 8/18/08 First Observations on the McCain Primary Matching Fund Case 8/15/08 The Wal-Mart Matter 8/14/08 |
 A site, developed by Bob Bauer, devoted to reporting and commentary on developments in the regulation of the political process—and related topics. Campaign Finance Reform Links The Brookings Institute's CFR site Center for Responsive Politics Center for Competitive Politics The FEC's BCRA rulemakings/update page Institute for Law and Politics Professor Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog Perkins Coie Political Law Group Stanford Law School's BCRA site |