Campaign Finance Reform - Take 2

It’s time to get active, and contact your state senators, and let them know to stand up for campaign spending limits. The US Supreme Court made a mistake when they declared that spending money is speech. In Buckley v. Valeo, they said that spending money on a campaign is free speech. Oddly, in the same case, they said that donating money to your candidate is not free speech.

So, basically, if you are a private citizen, spending money on your candidate is not free speech, but if you are a candidate, spending money is free speech. Boneheaded.

Aside from the obvious hypocrisy contained within this decision, they also ignored the simple fact that money is not speech - it is property - property that you trade for other property or services. Also, you can own money, in the same way that you can own a house, or an SUV - both not free speech - neither is money.

Limiting what candidates can spend on a campaigns doesn’t limit speech, it limits the ability to spend money on goods and services, which congress has full rights to regulate (See the US Constitution - Article I. Section 8 for example).

This stuff seems pretty simple, and I really struggle to see what these guys were thinking in 1976.

Anyway, click the link and tell your senators to sign on to a friend-of-the-court brief urging the Court to hear Landell v. Sorrell.

http://pirg.org/democracy/democracy.asp?id=174&id3=CFR&id4=ES&

Comments are closed.


Close
E-mail It