A federal judge on Tuesday sided with good government groups and the state of Connecticut in rejecting an effort by the Democratic Governors Association (DGA) to weaken Connecticut's campaign finance laws.
The DGA sought a temporary suspension of the enforcement of two specific provisions of the law: one having to do with limiting and defining coordination between candidates and those fundraising for them, and the second in regards to the distinction between advertising for a candidate and advertising for specific issues.
In 1989, Mitch McConnell was the junior senator from Kentucky, elected just four years earlier and fired up about a very important issue: campaign finance reform. Yes, you read that correctly. In 1989, Mitch McConnell was the lead sponsor on the Federal Election Enforcement Act, an act that advocated for contribution regulations and greater disclosure on the sources of expenditures.
New polling released yesterday by Greenberg Quinlan Rosner (for Democracy Corps) and Public Campaign Action Fund shows that concern over the influence of money-in-politics is one of the few areas with the power to breakthrough the otherwise divisive national conversation in top battleground districts.
Recent U.S. Supreme Court cases have left our campaign finance system in need of repair. The court opened the floodgates to corporate money in Citizens United v. FEC, and is currently considering overturning the aggregate contribution limits in McCutcheon v. FEC.
This week Senator Joe Tester of Montana introduced a proposal for a constitutional amendment to restrict corporate campaign spending. Last year over 75 percent of Montanans voted to pass a ballot measure urging their congressional delegation to support such a move. Tester's bill is just one of several that seek to restrict spending on campaign in the aftermath of recent court decisions weakening prior laws.
On Thursday, a federal appeals court in Iowa upheld key provisions of the state's campaign finance law. While the new ruling restricts the reporting requirements for organizations whose activity is not primarily political, it preserved bans on corporate donations. These statutes in particular are crucial for protecting the integrity of elections and empowering voters.
Justice Scalia was really being Justice Scalia yesterday at oral arguments for the challenge to Section 5: he called it "perpetuation of a racial entitlement" that Congress would never overturn because the name of the bill sounded nice. Sotomayor fired back to the lawyer: "Do you think the right to vote is a racial entitlement in Section 5?"
The chairwoman of the Committee on House Administration, Rep. Candice Miller (R-Mich.), should “hold hearings early in the 113th Congress on the Citizens United decision to examine potential legislative solutions to a system out of control, including consideration of disclosure reforms,” according to a letter sent by Public Campaign and 10 good government organizations today.