New Election Laws Pass Senate, Heading to Governor

Election reform bill headed to the Governor.

Text of bill can be found here.

Nothing too ground breaking that I can see.

FEC Set to Reject Facebook Ad Exemption Request

Facebook asked the FEC to exempt ads on its site from the "paid for by" disclosure requirement for political ads. It argued it was impractical to do so. The FEC has asked for a draft opinion rejecting that argument. It can be read here.

In relevant part:

The limitation on the size or the number of characters that Facebook allows to be included in a Facebook ad is not mandated by the physical limitations of the display medium or Internet technology. Neither is the limitation on the size of the ad set by a third party who established the technological medium and its use. Rather, Facebook indicates that it has set the small sizes for its ads because of Facebook's business decision that "larger ads would disrupt the social networking experience for Facebook users." Facebook's business decision in favor of small ads does not justify elimination of the statutory disclaimer requirement given that it remains physically and technologically possible for Facebook to increase both the size of its ads and the number of characters that may be included in its ads.

Citizens United decided: corps can give

Citizens United decision was released today. From National Journal:

The Supreme Court on Thursday struck down some key provisions of landmark campaign finance legislation in a move experts agree paves the way for more corporate money to enter the political system.

In a 5-4 decision in Citizens United v. FEC, the Court's majority threw out sections of the legislation that bans corporations and labor unions from funding some political advertisements. Corporations and unions may fund those communications out of their general treasuries, overturning earlier rulings that had divided individual and corporate expenditures into different categories.

You can read the entire opinion here. The very cliffed cliff notes:

(1) Corporations can spend freely on political causes.

(2) Any corporation that spends more then $10,000 must file a disclosure with the FEC.

(3) Any political ad by a corporation must include the standard disclaimer of who is paying for the ad.

So what are the long term/short term implications of this groundbreaking ruling?

Deb Mell survives, for now

The Chicago Board of Elections has ruled that Deb Mell can remain on the ballot. (See CBS 2 article). I previously posted on the challenge to Mell's petitions. The petitions she circulated had her residence at an address that was different from the one she is registered to vote under. Turns out Mell moved during 2008 but forgot to update her voter registration with her new address. Her petitions were circulated under her new address. (How in the world does an elected State Rep., with so much insider status as Mell, forget to register to vote!)

Well established law in Illinois states that a petition signor needs to be registered at the address they print on the petition. Also, a candidate must file a statement of candidacy in which the candidate swears they reside at a particular address, and are "qualified" voters at that address. I stated my opinion that Mell may be in trouble with this one. However, the hearing officer interpreted that statute differently then how I read it. She stated that being qualified to be a voter is different then being actually registered to vote, and therefore, there was no requirement in the statute that a candidate for the General Assembly be a registered voter at all. She also state "I find this additionally troubling because I cannot believe that the legislature intended for this particular office … that Candidates have a lesser connection to the voting process than petition signers." Interpreting the law as she did, the hearing officer rejected the petition challenge.

Laiacona is appealing the hearing officer's decision to the circuit court. Here is the sum of his argument (from the challenge memorandum of law which I obtained on Eric Zorn's blog):

Illinois Election Code §8-8 which sets the requirements for nominating papers for General Assembly candidates does not directly require that that the candidate be a registered voter but it indirectly does when it requires that the candidate, under oath, “shall state that the candidate is a qualified primary voter of the party to which the petition relates.” ...Because (Mell) was not a registered voter at the address from which she is seeking office although she claimed to be on her statement of candidacy and because (she) was not a registered voter capable of voting at any address in the district she seeks to represent at the time she signed and filed her statement of candidacy, the objection should be granted and, for now, (Mell) denied ballot access. Now that she is a registered voter at the address at which she resides in the District, she can seek election as a write-in, under the banner of a new party, or by appointment to a vacancy in nomination of which there will likely be two.

I am a constant objector to the harsh ballot access requirements in Illinois, and the proclivity of throwing people's names off the ballot for technical purposes. However, I am an even stronger objector of only giving deference to politically connected insiders. If technicalities is what wins the day, then I am inclined to be sympathetic to the challenge in this case.

Rauschenberger not republican enough to run on GOP ticket?

Steven Rauschenberger, a leading conservative voice in the Illinois GOP, may be kicked off the ballot for not being "republican" enough (from the Daily Herald):

In the latest bizarre chapter of Illinois' thick history of kicking candidates off the ballot, Rauschenberger could lose his spot in the GOP primary because he pulled a Democratic ballot for February's local elections...

That is because Rauschenberger pulled a Democratic ballot in April's primary to support his sister's bid for a trustee post in Elgin Township.

The theory goes that because Rauschenberger most recently voted Democratic, he can't legitimately run as a Republican in the primary.

Ironically, the wrinkle in Illinois law came about partly because a suburban Republican incumbent challenged a Democratic opponent's party credentials in a 2008 general election race.

A little background could be useful to help you make sense of the article. Rauschenberger was a State Senator for 14 years representing the Elgin area. He opted to run for Lt. Governor in 2006 when his senate seat was also up for re-election, effectively retiring his senate seat. Rauschenberger lost the primary election for Lt. Governor and decided to run again for his old senate seat, currently held by a Democrat.

I am doing some research on this issue as it is fascinating, and I will update you soon.

Conflicts of interest highlight problems with election regulation

DuPage recently held hearings on most of the petition challenges filed in the county. From the Daily Herald:

Only one of the six DuPage County candidates who had their nominating paperwork challenged was kicked off the ballot after hearings before the county's electoral board Friday.

This is what I found to be most interesting:

Election commission attorney Pat Bond and commission Chairman Rick Carney were absent from most of the morning's hearings because of possible conflicts of interest. Bond has done work for Zaruba in the past, and either contributed to the campaigns of the other candidates or their opponents. Carney, the county's former recorder, also has been a supporter of the candidates or their opponents.

Attorney Burt Odelson stepped in for Bond during four of the hearings, and Wood Dale Mayor Ken Johnson was appointed by Chief DuPage Judge Stephen Culliton to replace Carney on the electoral board for all six objections.

DuPage County has an independent election commission. (I think this is the only county-wide election commission in Illinois). This article highlights some of the problems with an independent election commission. Many of the people involved with the commission are also highly involved in local politics - creating conflicts when resolving disputes between various candidates. This shouldn't be a surprise. What is kind of surprising is that during the busiest time for any election commission, on what is probably their most important duty next to voter registration, many members of the board are too conflicted to carry that duty out. Maybe the system worked perfectly as those that were conflicted excused themselves from a hearing on the merits. But I can't help but wonder what is the point of paying for an election commission full of people who can't perform their duty? Is there a better way to handle petition challenges in DuPage?

Voter Registration Extended (again)

Early voting has become the norm across the country and, although late to the game, it has become very important in Illinois. A new law will extend the period of "grace period voting" in Illinois for another week. Grace period is in reference to the a small window of time during early voting when a person can register and vote at the same time. This effectively extends the time frame where unregistered persons can register (although they must go in person to their election authority). With the new law a person can register up to seven days prior to the election. This gets Illinois very close to same-day registration.