Week of 10.13.14

Welcome to the home of Social Lights. Read new online reports with photos each week and their reprise in the monthly print edition mailed to homes in Birmingham-Bloomfield at the start of each month. If you are not receiving the print edition by mail, you can order a subscription in the upper right index at the top of this page (subscriptions). If you want e-mail notification of when new Social Lights columns are posted to this site each Monday, sign up in the Newsletter Sign Up box at the lower right side of this home page.

Hickory Stick Invitational

For 17 years Marty Gillespie and Chuck Plein have been staging a unique golf event to raise funds for the Western Golf Association’s Evans Scholars college scholarship program for country club caddies. The required “weapons” and the dress code make it distinctive. In a salute to the history of the game, participants use pre-1930 clubs with wooden shafts and wear plus fours (knickers). They also salute the game’s Scottish origins. A kilt-wearing piper calls them to the first tee and, during the cocktail hour, they are offered Scotland’s national dish - haggis, a savory pudding made using sheep organs. When we got to Forest Lake Country Club for the post play scene of the 2014 event, we saw no one sample the haggis, but we did see reverence for the national drink of Scotland.
shadow
This weeks social light photos…

Print
Email Link
Feedback
Report
Share

Campaign funding


By Lisa Brody
News Editor
Campaign
shadow
(click for larger version)
06/02/2014 - The saying "money makes the world go round," is especially true in politics. Just as the rich guy may get the pretty girl, very often, it's the person with the deepest pockets and biggest purse who gets the most votes. It's not because they're buying those votes, but because money purchases access to voters, helps acquire credibility and can signal to others that they're a serious candidate.

As we enter another election season, the role money is playing in local elections is just as important as on a national level, and just as in flux. That is because of a recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling, McKutcheon v. FEC (Federal Election Commission), that was issued in April 2014, which struck down a decades-old cap on the total amount any individual can contribute to federal candidates in a two-year campaign cycle. It is believed that the ruling will increase the role money already plays in American politics, and follows another Supreme Court ruling, from 2010, Citizens United v. FEC. In the Citizens United case, the court ruled that the First Amendment prohibits the government from restricting expenditures by corporations, associations, or labor unions to campaigns. In essence, it permits PACs – political action committees, to spend as much money as they choose, either for a candidate, or against one, without any limits. And contrary to some interpretations, it is not one-sided. PACs, representing differing electoral ideologies, pour money into candidates and issues on both sides of the aisle.

"We've had some Supreme Court decisions that have really relaxed the rules, and changed those rules, and it's really a new game," noted John Klemanski, a political science professor at Oakland University. "We're going to see a lot more outside money because the Supreme Court basically said anyone who's interested in a race can give as much as they want."

Klemanski explained that in the Citizens United case, the court ruled that any source can spend unlimited amounts of money from any source, provided they were not actually coordinating with the campaign itself.

Jocelyn Benson, dean of the Wayne State University Law School, said this election cycle will realize the full effects of both Supreme Court rulings. "We're now seeing the influx of money coming into Oakland County. There are no requirements (from the rulings) to disclose all of the money coming in," she said. "The only requirements is the money from the PACs cannot be spent directly on the candidates. If money that is spent says specifically 'vote for', 'don't vote for', 'reject', or 'elect', then the ad has to disclose where the money has come from, otherwise they don't have to. If the ad says they're a bad person or a good person, they don't have to disclose anything, like some of the (Mark) Schauer (for governor) ads – 'The Schauer's over.' If they don't mention an election exactly, under Michigan law, they don't have to disclose their funding. It's new this year – (Gov.) Snyder just signed this into law."

...continued on page 2
Pages 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

Comments ()
Varsity Shop
Shades
SKBK
Back In Time
Coldwell Banker Weir Manuel
Legacy Jewelry and Loan
Click for Birmingham, Michigan Forecast

Register for Downtown's newsletters to receive updates on the latest news, social events and much more!

weekly update breaking news
social lights downtown deals
Site Search

Municipal meeting videos
spacer

Thanks for visiting Downtown