We use crowd-sourced assessments from X’s Community Notes program to examine whether there are partisan differences in the sharing of misleading information. Unlike previous studies, misleadingness here is determined by agreement across a diverse community of platform users, rather than by fact-checkers. We find that 2.3 times more posts by Republicans are flagged as misleading compared to posts by Democrats. These results are not base rate artifacts, as we find no meaningful overrepresentation of Republicans among X users. Our findings provide strong evidence of a partisan asymmetry in misinformation sharing which cannot be attributed to political bias on the part of raters, and indicate that Republicans will be sanctioned more than Democrats even if platforms transition from professional fact-checking to Community Notes.
Pascal Sabino (Bolts) has published an extensive and in-depth profile of challenges facing Native groups in North Dakota and elsewhere as they seek fair representation and equal access to the vote. Among the issues highlighted are the impact of:
A recent decision by a federal appeals court declaring that only the federal government can sue over violations of the Voting Rights Act, and
Reduced funding as donors and foundations have been “spooked” by “[f]ederal threats to criminalize foundations and nonprofits that focus on helping marginalized groups.”
I am pleased to welcome Ciara Torres-Spelliscy to the ELB Book Corner, writing about her new book Corporatocracy. This is the final of four posts:
What makes the money in politics hard to trace is the tendency of corporations to give to umbrella groups like the Senate Leadership Fund (run by Republican senator Mitch McConnell), the Congressional Leadership Fund (run by then-speaker Kevin McCarthy), or state-focused groups like the Republican Attorneys General Association (RAGA), Republican Governors Association (RGA), and Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC). Many of these groups give to each other in a never-ending shell game. For example, in 2022, Leonard Leo’s Judicial Crisis Network was RAGA’s biggest donor. Giving to Republican umbrella groups lends corporate donors a degree of plausible deniability when the politicians they support go rogue or get mired in a scandal.
These groups also act as financial pass-throughs for other more radical groups, like the Rule of Law Defense Fund (RLDF), which is an offshoot of RAGA. If a corporation gives to RAGA, they can deny that they funded RLDF. When looking at the flow of money in politics, one thing to remember is that money is fungible. Once cash goes into an umbrella political group, it’s hard to trace, but keep an eye on the big picture: corporate money is pouring into groups that support 2020 election deniers, electoral vote objectors, and lawmakers who are making it harder to vote in the United States in the future.
Another reason to take corporate political preferences seriously is the impact that the largest corporations often have on policy. As Delaware Justice Leo Strine notes, “not only do corporations have an advantage when it comes to getting their preferred candidates in office, but they have an advantage in steering the regulatory process as well. Regulators are deferential to industry input, and corporations use their huge financial advantage to dominate the regulatory and rule- making process, and to tie up agencies in litigation if they do not get their way.”
Corporatocracy gives citizens, consumers, investors, and corporations a different lens through which to consider decisions. If a decision or course of action would lead to failing the Democracy Litmus Test, that provides a strong reason not to do it. The more consumers care about democracy, the more they can use their buying power to incentivize corporate political spenders and politicians to take pro-democracy stances. Similarly, investors should steer their investment dollars to companies that are part of the democracy solution and not part of problem. Consumer and investor pressure, along with electoral engagement, can push the election deniers to the margins by starving them of the money they need to amplify their lies.
But that is not the only path America could walk down. The more that the election deniers are elected or reelected, the more corporate lobbyists and corporate leaders will kowtow to please the election deniers’ worldview. The more that election deniers are elected, the more normal their views will become. After all, of the 147 Republicans that voted to not recognize Biden’s electoral college votes, Kevin McCarthy (followed by Michael Johnson) and Steve Scalise had more power two years later than they did on January 6, 2021. They became the speaker of the House (followed by the speaker of the House) and the majority leader in 2023. The longer they remain in power, the more rational it seems to a corporate donor to just “give to the incumbent.”
Washington Post reports talk in Congress of putting in place procedures to fill vacancies if its members are assassinated in ways that upend the functioning of Congress. Similar discussions occurred after 9/11, according to the article. A plan would likely require a constitutional amendment. Still, the concern is this:
“‘We have a succession plan for the president,’ Wenstrup said at a House Administration Committee hearing in September focused on political violence.
But there is no plan to easily replace one or multiple House members should the worst happen. The Constitution requires the states to pull together a special election tofill individual vacancies, something that takes anywhere from three months to sometimes a year.
When there’s a clear, large House majority for one party, such a prolonged vacancy makes little difference to the institution at large.But now, after three straight elections left one party with just single-digit control of the lower chamber, every seat canmean the difference between majority control and legislation passing or failing.
‘The status quo also creates a perverse incentive for political violence through targeted killings designed to switch the majority party in the House,’ Kilmer said at last fall’s hearing.”
The Washington Post offers a lengthy treatment of issues and includes text from group chats among concerned lawmakers.
“State lawmakers — who tend to be far more accessible than their federal counterparts — are weighing new safety precautions and considering whether they should erect new barriers with voters to protect themselves from the public. They see changes as inevitable, but some fear they could chip away at their ability to connect with their communities and hear directly from the citizens they represent.”
“Threats to state lawmakers have drawn less attention but are common. In a 2023 Brennan Center survey of 354 state legislators from around the country, 43 percent said they had faced threats.”
“The New Jersey Supreme Court rejected a challenge to municipal political district drawing, short-circuiting litigation that could have led to a wave of redistricting lawsuits across the state.
The divided court ruled that judges need not consider mathematical formulas or community cohesion when deciding if a political district meets the state’s mandate for ‘compactness.'”
Divided decisions are apparently rare for the NJ Supreme Court. The case involved a challenge to the drawing of Jersey City wards, “with challengers claiming that the addition of wealthy high-rise residents into a low-income ward diluted the power of poor residents to elect a candidate that championed additional low-income housing.”
Bloomberg
“All five of the nominees to appellate and district courts wrote in response to the question submitted by the Senate Judiciary Committee’s top Democrat, Dick Durbin of Illinois, that Congress had certified Biden as the winner and that he… Continue reading
Ryan Reilly for NBC News:
FBI Director Kash Patel said this week the bureau had shared “alarming” — but unsubstantiated — allegations about manipulation of the 2020 election with a Republican member of Congress.
“The FBI has located documents which… Continue reading
Politico
In yet another cynical move, Eric Adams, who is running as an independent in NYC’s November mayoral race (rather than as a Democrat), is now seeking to run on two additional ballot lines: EndAntiSemitism and Safe&Affordable. He vows to… Continue reading
Bloomberg
X challenges the constitutionality of New York law requiring social media companies to disclose how they deal with hate speech, extremism, and disinformation. Similar to the California law struck down by the Ninth Circuit, “[t]he law, which goes into… Continue reading
Veteran election leaders today unveiled “The Montana Plan,” a ballot initiative that seeks to eliminate corporate and dark money from Montana politics without running afoul of Citizens United. The initiative would amend Montana’s constitution to prohibit the state from granting… Continue reading
N.Y. Times
In an appearance with writer Heather Cox Richardson in Connecticut, Obama “pointed to an erosion of traditional values like the rule of law, an independent judiciary, the freedom of the press and the right to protest.” He then went… Continue reading
