Slate has this interesting article by Megan Wiegand, “Does Stephen Colbert’s Endorsement of His Sister Violate Election Laws?” The article is especially interesting for what it says about the virtually-defunct “Equal Time” law for broadcasts sent out over the airwaves. Thanks to Rick Hasen for the link.
On April 25, the Federal Election Commission extended the exemption from campaign disclosure requirements for the Socialist Workers Party. The exemption was extended through December 31, 2016. See the finding here. The SWP has been exempt from reporting its federal campaign contributors, and its expenditures, since it won a case in the U.S. Supreme Court in 1982.
The New York City Independence Party has issued recommendations for election law changes in New York state. See them here. The party recommends that the Wilson-Pakula Law be repealed for large political parties such as the Democratic and Republican Parties, but preserved for smaller qualified parties. The Wilson-Pakula law gives party county chairs the power to decide whether a non-member of a party may run in that party’s primary.
The New York City Independent Party also wants non-partisan elections for city office, and says non-partisan elections would reduce corruption. The document does not acknowledge that an objective study of corruption among big cities in the U.S. recently determined that Chicago is the most corrupt large city in the United States, and that Chicago has non-partisan elections for all city office. Thanks to Mike Drucker for the link.
The Oyez Project, at www.oyez.org, has made it possible for anyone to listen to the oral argument in most U.S. Supreme Court cases of the past sixty years. Go to that web page. Choose “cases”. Then choose the decade the case was argued. Then choose the year it was argued. Then find the cases for that year, which are listed in alphabetical order. When one finds the case, one clicks on “oral argument” and then on “Download MP3.”
I just listened to the hour-long argument in Storer v Brown, a very important ballot access case argued in 1973. This resource is very useful for any historian or analyst of U.S. Supreme Court behavior. Although transcripts of these old oral arguments have long been available, listening to the argument is far more useful. The old transcripts don’t identify which justice said which statement, but veterans of the U.S. Supreme Court can know which justice spoke if they recognize that justice’s voice. Thanks to HowAppealing for the news about this resource.
Political scientist Richard J. Hardy wrote “The Paradoxes of Political Parties in American Constitutional Government” in 2011. Here is a link to his 27-page article. Even though it is not new, it is relevant today, especially since many individuals believe that political parties are not useful and that the U.S. would be better off if they didn’t exist. There are many books that make his points, but this article is much shorter than a book, and clear and convincing.
