Tag: Election Law

How Much Does Money Matter in Direct Democracy? – Commentary by John M. de Figueiredo

From Volume 78, Number 4 (May 2005)
DOWNLOAD PDF

The Supreme Court’s decision in McConnell v. FEC held that the broad outlines of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act passed both legal and constitutional scrutiny. The McConnell Court agreed with the defenders of the Act that the potential corruptive influence of special interest money in politics was a sufficient rationale for restricting the flow of money in unlimited quantities into candidate campaigns and political parties. Now the focus of activists has turned to ballot initiative and referendum campaigns. These groups have argued that the tight relationship of candidates to particular ballot initiatives creates the same corruptive influence that concerned the Court in candidate elections. Thus, there is an increasingly loud call for restrictions on ballot campaign financing.

It would seem, however, that before we heed calls for legislatively or judicially imposed restrictions on ballot measure financing, it would be prudent to know the effect of such financing on ballot outcomes. Knowing the effect of money in ballot measure campaigns would not only provide legal scholars with an important piece of information regarding whether restrictions on money are warranted, but it would also aid in the construction of those restrictions should they be needed. This short paper provides an overview of the statistical literature examining the effect of money on ballot measure outcomes and analyzes the validity of the statistical analyses.

 

78_1065

Regulating Democracy Through Democracy: The Use of Direct Legislation in Election Law Reform – Article by Nathaniel Persily & Melissa Cully Anderson

From Volume 78, Number 4 (May 2005)
DOWNLOAD PDF

Perhaps more than any other political phenomenon, incumbents’ capture of political institutions through the manipulation of the rules of the electoral game has commanded the attention of scholars of the law of democracy in recent years.

 

78_977

Commentary on “Regulating Democracy Through Democracy: The Use of Direct Legislation in Election Law Reform” – Commentary by Nolan McCarty

From Volume 78, Number 4 (May 2005)
DOWNLOAD PDF

At no time since the Populist and Progressive Eras has the confidence in America’s electoral process been so low. Just as those movements agitated in favor of an expanded franchise, nonpartisan elections, and the direct election of senators, current reformers have set their sights on term limits, the campaign finance system, and the mechanics of voting. Thus, it seems apropos to explore the link between one of the achievements of the earlier era, the voter initiative, and the uneven adoption of contemporary reform.

 

78_1035

Paying For Politics – Article by John M. de Figueiredo & Elizabeth Garrett

From Volume 78, Number 3 (March 2005)
DOWNLOAD PDF

With the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (“BCRA”) of 2002, Congress enacted the most sweeping reform of the federal campaign system in nearly thirty years. Commentators hailed the bill as the “most far-reaching and controversial attempt to restructure the national political process in a generation” and as the answer to Americans’ demand for reform “in order to reclaim the power of their voices and their votes.” When the Supreme Court endorsed virtually the entire bill as constitutional in McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, it set the stage for the 2004 election, the first to be held under the new campaign rules.

Shortly after the Court’s announcement, however, policymakers and jurists acknowledged the pressing need for further reform. For example, reform groups petitioned the Federal Election Commission (“FEC”) to extend regulation to § 527 organizations. These nonprofit organizations are not constrained by contribution limitations to the same extent as political parties and political action committees; and they raised hundreds of millions of dollars to influence the Fall 2004 election. Moreover, the 2004 presidential campaign, far from heralding a new era, emphasized the inadequacy of the presidential public funding system, as three major candidates – including the two major-party nominees, George W. Bush and John Kerry – declined federal matching funds during the primary season so that they could spend unlimited amounts of money before their party conventions. The Presidential Election Campaign Fund, which provides public money to presidential campaigns, did not have sufficient resources in early 2004 to pay what it owed the Democratic candidates who chose to participate in the system, and it is projected to be insolvent by 2008. In short, it has become clear that BCRA has not solved the problems of federal campaign financing, but is only – at best – an interim step in a continuing process. The challenge now is to determine the shape of the next reform.

 

78_591

Compulsory Voting in America – Note by Sean Matsler

From Volume 76, Number 4 (May 2003)
DOWNLOAD PDF

Persistently low voter turnout in the United States continues to disappoint lovers of democracy. When scarcely half of the population of eligible voters turns out for a presidential election once every four years – to say nothing of midterm congressional elections or local elections – it becomes difficult to defend American democracy as truly representative. Instead, the will of the active voters, who constitute a stark minority of the eligible voting population, ultimately determines the electoral outcome. This regrettable situation is not the essence of a participatory democracy.

Although low turnout might easily be blamed on an American electoral lethargy, it could also be understood as a failure of the American electoral structure to motivate voter turnout. Accepting that premise as fact, it becomes possible to treat declining voter turnout as an opportunity to reconsider what has until now been a staple of American democracy: voluntary voting.

 

76_953