Go to HHH home page.
Smart Politics
 


Humphrey Institute Event to Examine Impact of Citizens United

Bookmark and Share

On Tuesday afternoon, the University of Minnesota's Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs will host an event analyzing the impact of the recent Citizens United case, in which the Supreme Court overturned by a 5-4 margin earlier this year the prohibition of corporations and unions from spending money to support (or criticize) political candidates, such as through television advertising.

"Post Citizens United: What Corporate Contributions Mean for Our Political System," will include panelists from Common Cause Minnesota, Alliance for a Better Minnesota, and the executive director of the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board.

The event will be held:

Tuesday, October 12th, 2010
12-1:15 p.m.
Cowles Auditorium, Humphrey Institute
301 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis

From the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance's press release:

"Businesses, unions, and political activists are taking advantage of a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision to plow large amounts of cash into campaign ads. How has the Supreme Court's Citizens United case changed the landscape of political fundraising and advertising in Minnesota in 2010? Has one candidate been particularly helped by Citizens United?

Please join us for a lively conversation about the new political system introduced by Citizens United. The panelists include Denis Cardinal from Alliance for a Better Minnesota, Ben Golnik from Golnik Strategies, Gary Goldsmith, executive director of the Minnesota Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board, and Mike Dean, director of Common Cause Minnesota. The event will be moderated by Professor Larry Jacobs."

Follow Smart Politics on Twitter.

Previous post: From the Yankees to the Jets: Will the Vikings End Minnesota's New York Curse Tonight?
Next post: Republicans Positioned to Win Nine Midwestern U.S. Senate Seats for First Time Since 1920

Leave a comment


Remains of the Data

Strange Bedfellows: A Historical Review of Divided US Senate Delegations

Over the last century, states have been twice as likely to be represented by a single political party in the U.S. Senate than have a split delegation; only Delaware, Iowa, and Illinois have been divided more than half the time.

Political Crumbs

Haugh to Reach New Heights

The North Carolina U.S. Senate race between Democratic incumbent Kay Hagan and Republican Thom Tillis may go down to the wire next Tuesday, but along the way Libertarian nominee Sean Haugh is poised to set a state record for a non-major party candidate. Haugh, who previously won 1.5 percent of the vote in the Tar Heel State's 2002 race, has polled at or above five percent in 10 of the last 12 polls that included his name. The current high water mark for a third party or independent candidate in a North Carolina U.S. Senate election is just 3.3 percent, recorded by Libertarian Robert Emory back in 1992. Only one other candidate has eclipsed the three percent mark - Libertarian Christopher Cole with 3.1 percent in 2008.


Gubernatorial Highs and Lows

Two sitting governors currently hold the record for the highest gubernatorial vote ever received in their respective states by a non-incumbent: Republican Matt Mead of Wyoming (65.7 percent in 2010) and outgoing GOPer Dave Heineman of Nebraska (73.4 percent in 2006). Republican Gary Herbert of Utah had not previously won a gubernatorial contest when he notched a state record 64.1 percent for his first victory in 2010, but was an incumbent at the time after ascending to the position in 2009 after the early departure of Jon Huntsman. Meanwhile, two sitting governors hold the record in their states for the lowest mark ever recorded by a winning gubernatorial candidate (incumbent or otherwise): independent-turned-Democrat Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island (36.1 percent in 2010) and Democrat Terry McAuliffe of Virginia (47.8 percent in 2013).


more POLITICAL CRUMBS

Humphrey School Sites
CSPG
Humphrey New Media Hub

Issues />

<div id=
Abortion
Afghanistan
Budget and taxes
Campaign finances
Crime and punishment
Economy and jobs
Education
Energy
Environment
Foreign affairs
Gender
Health
Housing
Ideology
Immigration
Iraq
Media
Military
Partisanship
Race and ethnicity
Reapportionment
Redistricting
Religion
Sexuality
Sports
Terrorism
Third parties
Transportation
Voting