Commentary From the Mile High City

 
"Star of the conservative blogosphere" Denver Post

"The Rocky Mountain Alliance offers the best of what the blogosphere has to offer." -David Harsanyi, Denver Post
 
 contact
Joshua Sharf
PDA
 search

 notify list
to receive email when this site is updated, enter your email address:
 archives
 recent posts
 categories
24 (2 entries)
Anglosphere (1 entries)
Biking (1 entries)
Blogging (35 entries)
Business (173 entries)
CFA (3 entries)
China (5 entries)
Climate Change (3 entries)
Colorado (20 entries)
Denver (12 entries)
Design (4 entries)
Economics (39 entries)
Education (6 entries)
Electoral College (1 entries)
Environmentalism (3 entries)
Europe (0 entries)
Flying (2 entries)
Foreign Affairs (1 entries)
General (89 entries)
Gun Control (2 entries)
Health Care (7 entries)
Higher Ed (7 entries)
History (8 entries)
Home Improvement (1 entries)
Illegal Immigration (35 entries)
Internet (4 entries)
Israel (57 entries)
Jewish (49 entries)
Judicial Nominations (12 entries)
Katrina (0 entries)
Literature (1 entries)
Media (37 entries)
Music (3 entries)
Photoblogging (32 entries)
Politics (152 entries)
Porkbusters (5 entries)
Radio (16 entries)
Religion (1 entries)
Reviews (8 entries)
Robed Masters (4 entries)
Science (1 entries)
Sports (9 entries)
Taxes (2 entries)
Transportation (6 entries)
Unions (1 entries)
War on Terror (180 entries)
 links
 blogs
my other blogs
Three-Letter Monte
Blogcritics.org
PoliticsWest.Com
Newsbusters.org

Rocky Mtn. Alliance
Best Destiny
Daily Blogster
Drunkablog
Exvigilare
Geezerville USA
Mount Virtus
Night Twister
Rocky Mountain Right
Slapstick Politics
The New Conservative
Thinking Right
View from a Height

other blogs
Powerline
One Big Swede
American Thinker
Meryl Yourish
Instapundit
NRO Corner
Little Green Footballs
No Left Turns
A Constrained Vision

business blogs
800CEORead
Accidental Verbosity
Assymetrical Information
BusinessPundit
Carnival of the Capitalists
Catallarchy
Cold Springs Shops
Commodity Trader
Coyote Blog
Different River
EconLog
Everyone's Illusion
Fast Company Blog
Financial Rounds
Footnoted
Freakonomics Blog
ShopFloor.org
Lip-Sticking
Management Craft
Trader Mike
Carnival of the Capitalists Submission

business data
Inst. Supply Mgmt.
St. Louis Fed Economic Data
Nat'l Bureau of Economic Research
Economic Calendar
Stock Charts

colorado blogs
Pirate Ballerina
Pagan Capitalist
Boker Tov, Boulder
Colorado Pols
Jeff Sherman

<-?Colorado BlogRing#->

sites, not blogs
Thinking Rock Press
 help israel
Israel Travel Ministry
Friends of the IDF
Volunteers for Israel
Magen David Adom
CAMERA
 1939 World's Fair
1939: The Lost World of the Fair
The New York World's Fair: 1939-1940
The Last Great Fair by Jeffrey Hart
Iconography of Hope (U.Va.)
Images From the '39 Fair
Tour the 1939 New York Fair
Paleo-Future
Powered by
Movable Type 3.2

« What Karl Told James | Main | How To Make a Plane Disappear »

Denver Post: Free Speech = "Loopholes"

For the Denver Post, First Amendment protections apparently are "loopholes" to be examined.

In an article about free speech campaign finance restrictions, the Post focuses on conservative groups' efforts, while biasing the article in favor of such restrictions in general.

(This isn't the first site to notice the - oddity - of the state Democrats becoming concerned about the new campaign finance laws just as the Republicans begin to figure them out. Apparently the game is to keep the rules moving just fast enough to stay ahead of your opponents in understanding them, while retaining the moral high ground of "reform.")

The Post has not always been so solicitous of public opinion, especially when it comes to illegal immigration and gay marriage.

Even if government lawyers or state legislators come up with ways to better regulate the flow of money...

No, no assumptions here. In an article about "loopholes," "better regulate" means closing those "loopholes," or further restricting speech.

...it won't be in time to impact the 2006 elections. The contests include an open governor's race and an open seat in the 7th Congressional District, 65 state House races and 17 Senate seats. Republicans could regain a majority in the Senate by taking back just one seat.

How, exactly, is this last more relevant than the Democrats gaining a majority of the state's Congressional delegation through tha open 7th District seat? Or the effect of any number of other electoral outcomes? Apparently, the main issue is the tenuous nature of Democratic control of the State Senate.

In 2002, Colorado voters overwhelmingly passed Amendment 27, which overhauled campaign- finance disclosure rules in an effort to get big money out of politics. The measure limited campaign contributions, encouraged candidates to curb their spending and banned corporate and union contributions to candidates and parties.

The unintended effect, say some political observers, has been to encourage interest groups to exploit gray areas in the law and invoke broad constitutional protections such as free speech to continue the activities voters sought to regulate.

Imagine that! People using First Amendment guarantees to safeguard their free political speech.

For instance, the Independence Institute has been accused of running political ads couched as educational material. Critics say the Golden-based think tank should disclose donors who have supported its radio ads about Referendums C and D. The institute says it is merely educating the public.

Apparently, they missed this proclamation by a 501(c)3 in favor of Referenda C and D. This decision has been defended on the grounds that it's a referendum, not a candidate being supported, a distinction that apparently escaped the notice of the Post when writing about the Institute.

In fact, the main abuse of system was by Democrats in the 2004 State legislative campaigns:

Colorado Democrats used the loophole last year, a maneuver largely credited with giving Democrats control of both legislative chambers.

That's the extent of the article's mention of 2004. The fact that not all of these activities were exactly, uh, legal seems to have evaded Mesdames Caldwell and Crummy.

In fact, the article devotes 78 words to Democratic and union groups, and 328 words to offenses - real or imagined - by conservative or Republican groups.

Loopholes grow in election law

As more groups win court battles and find ways to skirt campaign-finance rules, some are considering more regulations.

By Alicia Caldwell and Karen E. Crummy
Denver Post Staff Writers

Three years after Colorado voters overwhelmingly passed campaign-finance reforms, political and ideological groups are finding new ways around election-law restrictions.

They're winning important battles in the courtroom, and with campaigning already underway for several major 2006 races, these groups are pushing their agendas in ways unforeseen - and largely unregulated.

These developments have the Colorado secretary of state's office and key state legislators considering whether the state should pass new regulations.

"You can only hold water in your hands so long before it begins to seep through your fingers," said state House Majority Leader Alice Madden, a Boulder Democrat, who said it may be time for the legislature to revisit campaign-finance reform.

Independent political groups, whose identities and funding sources are difficult to discern, took advantage of a tax loophole to funnel millions of dollars into Colorado state elections last year. Routing money through these so-called 527 committees is expected to increase in key races next year.

Even if government lawyers or state legislators come up with ways to better regulate the flow of money, it won't be in time to impact the 2006 elections. The contests include an open governor's race and an open seat in the 7th Congressional District, 65 state House races and 17 Senate seats. Republicans could regain a majority in the Senate by taking back just one seat.

In 2002, Colorado voters overwhelmingly passed Amendment 27, which overhauled campaign- finance disclosure rules in an effort to get big money out of politics. The measure limited campaign contributions, encouraged candidates to curb their spending and banned corporate and union contributions to candidates and parties.

The unintended effect, say some political observers, has been to encourage interest groups to exploit gray areas in the law and invoke broad constitutional protections such as free speech to continue the activities voters sought to regulate.

For instance, the Independence Institute has been accused of running political ads couched as educational material. Critics say the Golden-based think tank should disclose donors who have supported its radio ads about Referendums C and D. The institute says it is merely educating the public.

Last week, a federal judge made a ruling in a similar case that could open the door for hundreds of advocacy groups to engage in politicking without having to file financial disclosures.

In a case brought by Colorado Right to Life, a judge declared Colorado's definition of a political committee unconstitutional as applied to the group, which is a nonprofit advocacy corporation.

The group had, among other activities, run a radio ad in the 2002 general election comparing the abortion stances of Fourth Congressional District candidates Stan Matsunaka and Marilyn Musgrave, which was broadcast on Denver and Longmont stations. The group also encouraged people to call Matsunaka, a state senator at the time, and ask him to support a bill important to anti-abortion activists.

James Bopp, an Indiana lawyer who represented the group, said he believes dozens, if not hundreds, of Colorado groups could seek the same exemption that the federal judge found in the Colorado Right to Life case.

"And I hope they do, frankly," Bopp said. "I think it's outrageous that they're subjected to these unconstitutional restrictions."

In another case with implications for campaign-finance rules, the secretary of state is looking at whether Republican gubernatorial candidate Marc Holtzman skirted state election laws by appearing in television ads against Referendums C and D. If passed, those measures would allow the state to keep more tax money. The campaign to oppose Referendums C and D is funded in part by a $100,000 donation from Holtzman's father.

Critics accuse Holtzman of using his opposition ads as a backdoor way to bolster his campaign for governor and get around $1,000 contribution limits for candidates.

And in a recent administrative law decision now being appealed, a judge ruled that members of two Colorado teachers unions could, among other things, walk precincts with a state Senate candidate distributing the candidate's campaign literature. The judge found that the unions' voluntary activities didn't make them an arm of the candidate's campaign, which is prohibited by state laws.

The shifting campaign-finance scene in Colorado is in step with the rest of the country, said election-law experts. Many states, including Colorado, are trying to come up with reforms that are faithful to voter intent yet protect free-speech rights. Complicating matters, states have to navigate a separate tier of federal campaign-finance regulations.

"It's a mess," said Heather Gerken, an election-law expert at Harvard Law School. "The distinctions are muddied and get sillier and sillier."

The uncertainty in Colorado has led the state attorney general and the secretary of state's office to consider whether they need to more clearly define regulations, including a clearer definition of political committees, said Deputy Secretary of State William Hobbs.

Pete Maysmith, executive director of Colorado Common Cause, one of the architects of Amendment 27, said the initiative has largely worked. And while he doesn't oppose fine-tuning, he said he would look closely at proposed changes.

"There have been moves and there will be moves to turn on the spigot to push big money back into the campaigns," Maysmith said. "We think there's no place for that, and we oppose that."

Republican Rep. Keith King, a former House majority leader from Colorado Springs, called Amendment 27 a disaster that needs to be revisited.

"The intent was to force more accountability, and what it did was force more money to unaccountable 527s," King said.

The boom in so-called 527 committees, named after the applicable section of the tax code, was a result of a 2002 move by Congress to ban "soft money" contributions to national political parties. Soft money is money that is given to a political party but is not given to support a particular candidate.

A loophole in the law, however, allows 527 groups to claim tax-exempt status as political organizations while avoiding regulation under state and federal law. That makes it difficult to track their money.

Colorado Democrats used the loophole last year, a maneuver largely credited with giving Democrats control of both legislative chambers.

Republicans have started to form their own 527 groups. The increase in money flowing through these groups, in combination with newly defined loopholes for ideological and union groups, is set to change Colorado election dynamics in 2006.

Staff writer Alicia Caldwell can be reached at 303-820-1930 or acaldwell@denverpost.com.

Staff writer Karen E. Crummy can be reached at 303-820-1594 or kcrummy@denverpost.com.


Muddying the water of campaign finance
Amendment 27

Passed by Colorado voters in 2002:


Contributions from individuals and political committees are capped at $200 for legislative offices and $500 for governor, attorney general and other statewide offices.

Voluntary spending limits are permitted at $2.5 million, for example, for a gubernatorial candidate, descending from there for smaller campaigns to $65,000 for a state House seat. A candidate who accepts limits when their opponent does not may receive double the maximum contribution from individuals.

Corporations and labor organizations cannot provide funding for electioneering communication.

"Small donor committees" can collect $50 or less from individuals, and contribute 10 times more to candidates than the individual caps allow.

Direct corporate and union donations are banned.

Issue committees cannot contribute to political parties, political committees or candidate committees.

Political committees cannot contribute to issue committees.

Political ads must include who is paying for them.

All candidate, political, issue and small donor committees must disclose the contributors and include the occupation and employer of anyone contributing more than $100.
Tax code 527

Allows a tax-exempt organization created primarily to influence the nomination, election, appointment or defeat of candidates for public office.

Contribution restrictions: There are no upper limits on contributions to these committees, and no spending limits. Any type of donor may contribute, from individuals to unions to corporations, even other nonprofits. There is no specific prohibition on foreign contributions.

Disclosure requirements: All 527 groups have to register with the IRS and have to file periodic reports of contributions and expenditures.

Spending on federal candidates: 527s cannot coordinate with or contribute to a federal candidate in any way. They also may not expressly advocate for the election or defeat of a specific federal candidate, although 527s are free to portray federal candidates in such a way that there is little doubt as to the message.

State level spending: At the state level, the rules are different. Section 527 organizations generally can, and frequently do, give money directly to state and local candidates.

Sources: Amendment 27, Wikipedia, The Center for Public Integrity



  booklist

Power, Faith, and Fantasy


Six Days of War


An Army of Davids


Learning to Read Midrash


Size Matters


Deals From Hell


A War Like No Other


Winning


A Civil War


Supreme Command


The (Mis)Behavior of Markets


The Wisdom of Crowds


Inventing Money


When Genius Failed


Blink: The Power of Thinking Without Thinking


Back in Action : An American Soldier's Story of Courage, Faith and Fortitude


How Would You Move Mt. Fuji?


Good to Great


Built to Last


Financial Fine Print


The Day the Universe Changed


Blog


The Multiple Identities of the Middle-East


The Case for Democracy


A Better War: The Unexamined Victories and Final Tragedy of America's Last Years in Vietnam


The Italians


Zakhor: Jewish History and Jewish Memory


Beyond the Verse: Talmudic Readings and Lectures


Reading Levinas/Reading Talmud