Eliza Newlin Carney is a senior writer covering political money and election law for CQ Roll Call. Carney writes features, investigative stories and news articles for CQ Weekly. She also writes a Rules of the Game column for Roll Call that analyzes the latest developments in lobbying, political money and ethics. Carney signed on in 2011 as a Roll Call staff writer. She joined the CQ Weekly staff in April 2013.
Carney previously was a contributing editor at National Journal, writing about campaign financing and Washington's influence industry. She was an election law columnist for NationalJournal.com and NationalJournalDaily. She also contributed features and investigative stories to National Journal and Government Executive magazines, among others, and worked as a freelance writer.
Before that Carney spent close to 10 years as a National Journal staff correspondent covering Congress, political money and lobbying. She also wrote about abortion, health care and welfare. Before joining National Journal in 1991, she covered Capitol Hill for States News Service, where her subscribing newspapers included the New York Times and the Evening Sun of Baltimore. She previously worked as a daily newspaper reporter in the Philadelphia area.
Carney has offered commentary on C-SPAN, CNN, National Public Radio and the PBS NewsHour, among others. She also has taught journalism at George Washington University's School of Media and Public Affairs, and has written a chapter in a book, Abortion Politics in American States (M.E. Sharpe Inc., 1994.)
Carney has a master's degree from Columbia University's Graduate School of Journalism and a B.A. from Swarthmore College in Swarthmore, Pa. Her work has been recognized by the Capital Press Women and the Philadelphia Press Association. She lives in Silver Spring, Md., with her husband, Dan Carney, an editorial writer for USA Today, and their daughter, Elizabeth.
The chattering classes (no insult intended) are scrambling to come up with a snappy moniker for the joint fundraising committees that may emerge as political power centers in the wake of the Supreme Courtís recent McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission ruling.
Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus could hardly contain his glee during a conference call with reporters shortly after the Supreme Court ruled to strike the aggregate limit on campaign contributions.
Updated, 11:45 a.m. | In a long-awaited ruling in the case known as McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court today struck the aggregate limit on campaign contributions as an unconstitutional infringement on free speech.
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie may manage to put the George Washington Bridge scandal behind him, but even if he does, his ethics troubles wonít be over.
There is an oddly familiar ring to Democratsí escalating attacks on the conservative billionaire Koch brothers.
Updated, 5:20 p.m. | Republican leaders are stepping up their campaign to discredit tea party activists who are challenging them on Capitol Hill and on the campaign trail, accusing conservatives of lining their own pockets at the expense of the GOP.
As Treasury officials wade through more than 140,000 public comments on draft IRS rules to redefine permissible political activity by tax-exempt groups, they must now brace for at least one public hearing and a possible legal challenge.
As thousands of negative comments flood the Internal Revenue Service on the eve of a Feb. 27 deadline, GOP leaders are moving on several fronts to block the proposed IRS regulations that would curb political activity by tax-exempt groups.
When the Supreme Court deregulated independent political spending four years ago, the court reasoned that unrestricted money posed no corruption risk because a firewall separates candidates from their outside benefactors.
Business-friendly GOP organizers who launched a new crop of super PACs to counter the tea party have failed to cash in, recent campaign disclosures show, leaving them badly outraised on both the right and the left.
Having road-tested a low-dollar fundraising system in his own congressional campaign, Maryland Democrat John Sarbanes wants the entire House to follow suit.
Four years after the Supreme Court deregulated independent campaign spending in Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, the high court is poised to yet again turn American elections upside down.
The nationís top corporations gave more than $185 million in 2012 to tax-exempt groups that spent heavily on politics and lobbying, according to a report released today by the Center for Public Integrity.
Recently released tax forms shed light on the big salaries that an elite corps of political organizers earned during the 2012 elections ó and those who made the most often boasted the fewest wins.
The proliferation of super PACs and other unrestricted outside groups is further marginalizing women campaign donors, who are already vastly outnumbered by men, according to a report released Tuesday.
Deficient computer security at the Federal Election Commission has already led to high-level breaches and puts the agency ďat high riskĒ of continued hacking, according to a federal Inspector General report released this month.
Campaign spending trends were not as sensational this year as in 2012, when super PACs and other outside groups pumped more than $1 billion into politics, three times what they spent in the previous presidential election cycle.
Thirteen months after Election Day, the politically active nonprofits that spent more than $300 million in the 2012 campaigns without disclosing their donors are back in the news.
Now that the IRS has drafted new rules to rein in politically active tax-exempt groups, Rep. Chris Van Hollen and three allied watchdog groups have withdrawn their lawsuit challenging the tax agency to take action.
Politically active tax-exempt groups, which spent tens of millions in the previous election without disclosing their donors, would face tighter restrictions under new guidelines proposed Tuesday by the Treasury Department and the IRS.
For business-minded Republicans fed up with tea-party-led budget standoffs, the past few weeks have offered much to crow about.
The Federal Election Commissionís draft plan to approve the virtual currency known as bitcoins for campaign contributions may prove either a windfall or a losing gamble for politicians keen on testing new ways to raise money.
The same unrestricted money that flooded political campaigns in 2012 also inundated judicial elections and is threatening public confidence in the courts and the independence of the judiciary, a new report from a trio of groups warns.
Itís hard to say which should trouble Republican Party leaders the most right now: the sour mood among GOP donors, or the money suddenly swelling Democratic campaign and super PAC coffers.
The Supreme Courtís conservative majority Tuesday signaled that it remains strongly suspicious of campaign finance limits and may be poised to deregulate elections even further.