As we continue to debate the impact that money had on the 2012 federal races, along comes a very intriguing paper that looks at the question of spending a bit differently. And finds some rather significant effects. Instead of looking at the impact on individual candidates, Andrew B. Hall, a Ph.D. candidate at Harvard, has looked at the relationship between funding levels and partisan control. And he’s looked at the impact on the state level, and looked at it over several decades. All of which makes his paper, “Aggregate Effects of Campaign Spending” a worthwhile read.
Continue reading2Day in #OpenGov 11/19/12
NEWS ROUNDUP:
- Report calls for stronger IT oversight: Stronger oversight is needed on the $54 million spent by federal agencies for oversight and maintenance of IT, according to new report from the Government Accountability Office. (FedScoop)
- How to stop dark money: Is the influx of dark money in elections thanks to the Citizens United decision, or is it due to failures of the Federal Elections Commission? Trevor Potter, a former FEC commissioner and chairman, argues the FEC deserves the blame. (Washington Post, opinion)
- Super PAC finds its way into the dictionary: The term "super PAC" is being added to the Merriam-Webster dictionary. (Politico)
Come to CityCamp Oakland
On December 1, all roads will lead to Oakland, CA for CityCamp Oakland -- an unstructured conference where municipal employees, department heads, technology folks, developers, journalists and engaged citizens will talk about technology and local government. Organized by OpenOakland, the City of Oakland and other local organizations, CityCamp Oakland will show how innovative technology and open data can improve civic engagement, increase efficiency and government transparency while connecting residents to the city of Oakland. The Camp will be at the City Hall. Sunlight’s Evangelist, Bill Pease will also be present to share more on what we do, the data and tools we provide to support open government and our approach to local innovations.
Continue readingAfter election, dozens of super PACs shut down
The Colbert Report | Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c | |||
Colbert Super PAC SHH! - Secret Second 501c4 - Trevor Potter | ||||
|
After an election that saw unprecedented spending from outside groups, more than a hundred super PACs have already hit the self-destruct button. Many of the now-defunct organizations spent more on themselves than they did supporting political candidates.
Stephen Colbert announced on the Monday edition of his Comedy Central program the demise of his super PAC, Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow, Inc., on his Comedy Central show. With Trevor ...
Continue readingSo long Twinkie; so long political sugar
While the bankruptcy of Hostess Brands might have Americans worried about where they'll get their Twinkies, some politicians might be looking for new sources of green.
This morning, Hostess, the company that makes the treats, officially announced its liquidation and the subsequent lay off of about 18,500 employees in the midst of a labor dispute with the striking Bakery, Confectionery, Tobacco Workers and Grain Millers International Union (BCTGM). The bankruptcy filing cited the strike as the immediate cause, but also said its obligations to workers' pension funds made the firm uncompetitive.
While Hostess has offered politicians little more ...
Continue readingElection lawyers say super PACs should shift strategy
Given the underperformance of many outside spending groups in this year's election, some election lawyers suggested they shift strategies to focus more on mobilizing voters on the ground rather than TV ads in a panel discussion today.
The discussion took place at George Washington University Law School during a conference analyzing the 2012 campaign.
Super PACs that spent the most put their money into TV ads, noted Monica Yuan, a fellow at the Brennan Center for Justice. In contrast, unions and union-affiliated super PACs put much of their resources into get-out-the-vote efforts. The union groups were relatively successful compared ...
Continue readingLatino vote: Still a bargain in election 2012?
For months, pundits on both the right and left have said Latino voters would determine the presidential election. It looks like they were right. Not only did President Barack Obama manage to win 71 percent of the Latino vote (second only to former President Bill Clinton’s historic 73 percent of the Latino vote in 1994), but in key battleground states like Florida, Nevada and Colorado where Latino voters make up between 15 and 18 percent of eligible voters, Obama secured super majorities of the Latino vote. In Florida, there’s a lively debate over whether the president managed to secure a majority of the traditionally Republican Cuban vote -- a historic victory if so. Most importantly for Obama, the Latino base grew this year: All the indicators pointed to record high voter turnout from Latino voters this year. Overall, 28 Latinos won House seats this election, creating the largest class of Latino U.S. lawmakers in history. In the Senate, Latinos gained a seat with the victory Republican Ted Cruz, the first Hispanic senator to be elected from Texas. But for such an indisputably important demographic group and an election that saw more than $1 billion in outside spending, it appears that relatively little money was spent to influence the Latino vote using TV ads -- the most common way many campaigns get their message out and attempt to sway voters. In a political ad analysis of ads purchased on Spanish-language TV stations located in key swing states, Free Press found that from April to September the Obama campaign and supporting organizations had spent only $7 million — or 9 percent — of their ad dollars on Spanish language ads, while the Romney campaign and its supporters had spent a paltry $3.2 million, or 4 percent of their total ad dollars. These figures are especially disproportionate when placed into the larger context of this election cycle as media analysts project that over $300 billion was spent on political ads.
Continue readingHow Washington State is using Legislative privilege to stifle Right to Know
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by the guest blogger and those providing comments are theirs alone and do not reflect the opinions of the Sunlight Foundation or any employee thereof. Sunlight Foundation is not responsible for the accuracy of any of the information within the guest blog. Jason Mercier is the Director of the Center for Government Reform at Washington Policy Center. He is also a contributing editor of the Heartland Institute's Budget & Tax News, a columnist for Northwest Daily Marker, a contributing author at State Budget Solutions, serves on the board of the Washington Coalition for Open Government, and was an advisor to the 2002 Washington State Tax Structure Committee. In 1972, Washington State voters overwhelmingly enacted Initiative 276, providing citizens with access to most records maintained by state and local government. The new law created the Public Records Act (PRA). The preamble to the PRA says: “The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies that serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may maintain control over the instruments that they have created.
Continue reading2Day in #OpenGov 11/16/12
NEWS ROUNDUP:
- House member drops amendment to bring back earmarks: A House Republican dropped his amendment to bring back earmarks after Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) voiced opposition. Republicans adopted a ban on earmarks in 2010. (The Hill)
- State governments challenge dark money: The election is over, but several states challenged or are continuing to battle groups that tried to influence elections and hide the sources of their money. States are limited in terms of what they can do about practices by national groups, however. (Pew States)
A revealing glance at the freshmen of the 113th Congress
In stark contrast to the current crop of House freshmen, which we reported on extensively earlier this year, the soon-to-be newly sworn in members of the 113th Congress is considerably more balanced politically; however, analysts warn that it will likely be the most divided class yet.
Of the 89 new House members taking their oaths of office for the first time in January, 2011, after an election marked by a Tea Party tide, just nine were Democrats. So far this year (a few races remain to be called), there are 74 first-timers slated to take office next year, 44 Democrats ...
Continue reading