campaign finance: unintended consequences...or not?


PDA






Monkeyleg
July 10, 2004, 12:18 AM
The co-author of the Campaign Finance Reform legislation (otherwise known as the Repeal of the First Amendment) is facing some serious challengers here in WI.

The best-funded challenger is Russ Darrow, who owns 20 new car dealerships that bear his name. He's been running a fair number of campaign ads, and is largely funding his own campaign for the moment.

And therein lies the rub. Since the car ads mention "Russ Darrow Pontiac" or "Russ Darrow Buick," the question before the Federal Elections Commision is whether the ads for his car dealerships constitute illegal political advertising. Yep, that's right, folks. They're suggesting that his company not run any advertising 60 days before the election.

That sixty-day period is also one during which most car dealers advertise the most.

Not even George Orwell or Ayn Rand could have predicted this.

The full story is too long to post here, so here's the link: http://www.jsonline.com/news/state/jul04/242434.asp

If you enjoyed reading about "campaign finance: unintended consequences...or not?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
deej
July 10, 2004, 12:34 AM
Everything old is new again:



http://scifistorm.org/article.pl?sid=03/08/13/2352253&mode=thread

Ironically this happened before - in 1973, when Star Trek alum George Takei ran for LA City Council. A local station aired a rerun of Star Trek, and it cost them an entire evening of programming to give equal time to 14 candidates.

If you enjoyed reading about "campaign finance: unintended consequences...or not?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!