Redstate

Posted at 12:05pm on Jun. 26, 2008 Supreme Court Quotes of the Day, Non-Heller Edition (Or: A Good Day For The First Amendment, Too)

By Dan McLaughlin

Justice Alito's opinion this morning in Davis v. FEC won't get as much attention as Heller, and breaks a lot less new ground, simply holding that Congress can't set up one set of contribution-and-expenditure campaign finance rules for everyone and then a second set of rules giving an unequal advantage intended to 'level the playing field' for candidates whose opponents are able to self-finance all or part of their campaigns (the so-called "Millionaires' Amendment," one of the more egregiously incumbent-protective features of McCain-Feingold). The Court's 5-4 majority (you can guess the lineup) didn't tinker with any of the existing and misguided structure of campaign finance regulation that's existed since the 1976 Buckley v. Valeo opinion, as Justice Alito was careful to note that the parties had not asked the Court to reconsider Buckley. Instead, the Court rather pointedly told Congress that if it had made a mess of campaign finance regulation, that's Congress' problem, not the Court's.

Read on . . .

Posted in bcra | campaign finance reform | Justice Alito | Law | mccain-feingold — Comments (5) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 7:39pm on Apr. 21, 2008 Kinda Like That "Parallel Public Financing System"

By Dan McLaughlin

The NY Times on the "Millionaires' Amendment" case:

On Tuesday the Supreme Court will hear a legal challenge to the so-called millionaires’ amendment. It should uphold Congress’s modest effort to help candidates who rely on outside contributions to get their messages out to the voters.

Posted in bcra | mccain-feingold | Sigh. I Guess I'm For McCain. | The Courts | The New York Times — Comments (0) / Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 6:34pm on Jan. 11, 2008 Supreme Court To Hear Another McCain-Feingold Case

Not The Message The Statute's Sponsor Wants In The News

By Dan McLaughlin

The Supreme Court today decided to hear the case of Davis v Federal Election Commission (No. 07-320 on the Court's docket). The case focuses on the constitutionality of the so-called "millionaire's amendment," one of the more egregious examples of the pro-incumbent tilt in the statute (which makes no similar allowance for challengers to incumbents with huge war chests); the petitioner's brief frames the issue as follows:

Read On...

Posted in bcra | John McCain | Law | mccainfeingold — Comments (5)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 8:17am on Apr. 5, 2007 McCain-Feingold vs. the McCain campaign

Doctor, heal thyself

By krempasky

How wonderful that this WaPo column on the super-fantastic effects of McCain-Feingold was published on April 1st. Compounding the effect was the McCain campaign's lackluster performance in the "Money Primary" - even though Senator McCain's vaunted law actually increased donation limits.

I had hoped to directly address this myth that BCRA has worked (not to mention that the definition of "worked" has nothing to do with the bill of goods we were sold when it passed, that it would stem the tide of money and corruption). But lucky for me, I didn't have to - because Bob Bauer (unfortunately for him, I've smeared him the past as my favorite Democrat) dismantles it quite nicely here.

Posted in Archived | bcra | campaignfinance — Comments (3)/ Email this page » / Read More »

Posted at 12:17pm on Mar. 27, 2007 McCain-Feingold: no reason to celebrate this anniversary

Here's to rethinking the premise

By krempasky

Today marks the 5th anniversary of President Bush's signing of a law which he claimed at the time to be unconstitutional. Five years ago today, John McCain got his way - enshrining into law some of the most sweeping restrictions of speech since the Alien and Sedition Acts. (more from Tapscott and CampaignFreedom)

With sweet irony, starting from the premise that money in politics = bad, McCain and his supporters in the "academic" and non-profit community steered millions of tax-exempt dollars into creating the mythology of a public outcry about campaign finance. Using registered lobbyists like Fred Wertheimer and company - even using his own PAC and campaigns at times - our government criminalized the most valuable form of speech: that of citizens criticizing their government.

What are we left with? A class of elites (most of which bill $400 an hour to advise their well-heeled clients on "compliance") who use the power of law to chill the speech of smaller speakers. And worse, their paranoia and desire to close loopholes knows no bounds. They even tell us that, no matter how complex or daunting the laws might be, "they are well worth whatever inconvenience and lawyers’ fees they may generate" (note: nice of the lawyers to look out for each other)

Oh, and by the way: I'm sure you've noticed the drastic reduction in political corruption. That's right - the freaking law doesn't even work.

Read on . . .

Posted in bcra | FEC | mccainfeingold | speech — Comments (6)/ Email this page » / Read More »