McCain Feingold?


PDA






limbaughfan
June 12, 2007, 02:15 PM
What are the chances of getting it repealed?

If you enjoyed reading about "McCain Feingold?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
Art Eatman
June 12, 2007, 02:25 PM
Somewhere between slim and none, and Slim left town. It's more "Incumbent Protection Act" stuff, so there's no impetus in Congress to object to it. Big Media luvs it, since it cuts competition.

Art

mljdeckard
June 12, 2007, 03:38 PM
I can certainly see a supreme court appeal eventually making its way up the chain, but it will take many years.

nobody_special
June 12, 2007, 03:57 PM
It was tested by the Supreme Court in McConnell v. FEC (http://www.fecwatch.org/law/court/mcconnelltable.asp). Most (but not all) provisions were upheld. It's here to stay.

I'm not sure that's a bad thing, either... but then, I'm pretty strongly against corporate political influence.

Waitone
June 12, 2007, 07:47 PM
Classic example of the Political Ratchet. The badguys (you select) pass legislation the good guys (again, you select) objects to. "This shall not stand" is thundered across the land. So sooner or later a court case appears and it head to SCOTUS. Surprise, surprise, surprise SGT Carter. SCOTUS says "No problemo" So the good guys thunder again, "This will not stand; and we mean it this time." The good guys sponsor legislation and for some reason it is never enacted. The "bad guys" get the legislation they want. The good guys look good railing against the machine. But bottom line is nothing happens. No rollback. Yet we are a little less free than the day before.

Examples of the "political ratchet" in just the last presidency include the Patriot Act, Kelo, McCain Feingold. Every last one of them restrict our freedom. Every last one was tested in court. Every last one was justified due to circumstance. And every last one is constitutionally questionable. I'm so glad I live in the land of the free and home of the brave. . . . for now.

BTW, campaign finance corruption is easy to fix. No limits and 100% transparancy. No funds come into the campaign except through 1 checking account. The account is posted on line as a searchable database. The bank hold the checking account is tasked with seeing to it funds in the account are not usable unless identification information is posted. Full disclosure consists of names of people or organizations. No anonymous or in kind donations. Full transparency will go a long way toward cleaning up the campaign system. Instead our elected idiots restricts my right to free political speech.

Kali Endgame
June 12, 2007, 08:08 PM
Waitone,
Good post. Transparancy is important. PAC's and their ilk have, entirely, too much control over the politicians. The voters have lost their voice.

Flyboy
June 12, 2007, 09:03 PM
"But I would rather have a clean government than one where quote First Amendment rights are being respected...."
--John McCain (yes, he actually inserted the derisive verbal scare-quote to describe the right to free speech)
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/10/AR2006051001787.html

mljdeckard
June 28, 2007, 10:46 AM
Just realizing, I was sure that someday someone would make a challenge that would topple McCain-Feingold, I had no idea that it was happening as I was typing.

It was just too flagrantly broad, there was no way it was going to last forever.

ServiceSoon
June 28, 2007, 07:00 PM
The voters have lost their voice.

Should there be two classifications of special interest? The NRA is an organization that has many individual voices whereas large companies have a few voices.

ArmedBear
June 28, 2007, 07:04 PM
SCOTUS ruled part of it invalid this week. In fact, they ruled against Feingold himself.

The odds of it being torn down piece by piece are not as bad as some may think. Some people think that, eventually, SCOTUS may effectively reverse the earlier decision, based on cases that emerge from the real-world results of McCain-Feingold.

WSJ had a big editorial about it sometime in the last couple days.

I'm still pissed off, but more optimistic about this than I was a few weeks ago.

Should there be two classifications of special interest? The NRA is an organization that has many individual voices whereas large companies have a few voices.

Some of the restrictions on the NRA and other advocacy groups were removed on Monday by the Supreme Court, like I said.

http://www.dailymail.com/story/Opinion/Don+Surber/200706285/Court-to-censors-Take-a-hike-to-Morocco/

Flyboy
June 29, 2007, 08:22 PM
McCain's pissed off, too:
"It is regrettable that a split Supreme Court has carved out a narrow exception by which some corporate and labor expenditures can be used to target a federal candidate in the days and weeks before an election."
Or, as Reason (http://reason.com) put it, John McCain Regrets Free Speech During an Election (http://reason.com/blog/show/121111.html).


I swear, I don't think that man would recognize the Constitution if you rolled it up and hit him in the head with it.

longeyes
June 29, 2007, 10:46 PM
Classic example of the Political Ratchet.

Very nice. The joints of this Republic are definitely creakin'.

ArmedBear
June 29, 2007, 11:43 PM
McCain's pissed off, too

Like his buddy Sarah Brady, when McCain's pissed off, I'm usually happy about why.:p

If you enjoyed reading about "McCain Feingold?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!