Is the the beginning of McCain-Feingold fallout?

Status
Not open for further replies.

onerifle

Member
Joined
Dec 2, 2003
Messages
176
Location
Texas
RNC tells TV stations not to run anti-Bush ads
GOP committee says MoveOn.org's spots are illegally financed

Sunday, March 7, 2004 Posted: 12:07 AM EST (0507 GMT)

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/03/07/moveon.ads/index.html

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Republican National Committee is warning television stations across the country not to run ads from the MoveOn.org Voter Fund that criticize President Bush, charging that the left-leaning political group is paying for them with money raised in violation of the new campaign-finance law.

"As a broadcaster licensed by the Federal Communications Commission, you have a responsibility to the viewing public, and to your licensing agency, to refrain from complicity in any illegal activity," said the RNC's chief counsel, Jill Holtzman Vogel, in a letter sent to about 250 stations Friday.

"Now that you have been apprised of the law, to prevent further violations of federal law, we urge you to remove these advertisements from your station's broadcast rotation."

But MoveOn.org's lawyer, Joseph Sandler, said in a statement that the ads were funded legally, calling the RNC's letter "a complete misrepresentation of the law."

"The federal campaign laws have permitted precisely this use of money for advertising for the past 25 years," he said.

And MoveOn.org, which was planning to spend $1.9 million on an ad buy that started Thursday, said Friday that it would spend another $1 million.
'Soft money' targeted

The RNC charges that because the ads are designed to help defeat President Bush, the group cannot pay for them with unlimited "soft money" contributions but only with contributions raised in amounts less than $5,000.

Although MoveOn.org is a so-called "Section 527" organization that is legally allowed to raise soft money in unlimited amounts from donors, the new campaign-finance law prohibits the group from using those funds to pay for ads that directly attack Bush, Vogel said.

And in a bit of political one-upmanship, the letter quotes the presumptive Democratic nominee, Sen. John Kerry, as saying that the objective of the new law "is to eliminate altogether the capacity of soft money to play the role that it does in our politics."

But MoveOn.org says it has raised $10 million for advertising from 160,000 donors, in amounts averaging $50-$60. It is running two ads in 67 TV markets in what its Web site describes as 17 "battleground" states.

"It's not surprising that [RNC Chairman] Ed Gillespie continues to make false claims about the legality of our campaign in order to silence us," Wes Boyd, president of the voter fund, said in a statement. "Our lawyers continue to assure us that our advertising, and the small contributions from tens of thousands of our members that pay for it, conform in every way to existing campaign-finance laws."

The group maintains that a recent ruling from the Federal Election Commission supports the method it is using to fund the ads. But in her letter to the stations, Vogel said that FEC ruling makes it clear that any ad that "promotes, supports, attacks or opposes" a federal candidate comes under the contribution limits, which she charges MoveOn is violating.

One of the ads, called "Worker," ends with the tag line, "George Bush. He's not on our side." The other, called "Child's Play," shows small children working at various jobs and ends with the tag line, "Guess who's going to pay off President Bush's $1 trillion deficit?"
RNC: Problem with funding, not content

Vogel insisted that the RNC's problem with the ads stemmed from their funding, not their content.

"I write not because of the misleading allegations contained in the advertisement, which will be answered in due time, but because running this advertisement breaks the law," Vogel's letter said.

MoveOn.org has been running ads for several months on cable channels, which don't fall under FCC regulations. However, CBS refused to broadcast the group's ads during the Super Bowl, saying the network did not run issue advertising.

MoveOn.org and other groups trying to defeat Bush have been raising money to help the Democratic nominee compete with the president's vast war chest in the period between the end of the Democratic primaries and the political conventions. The Bush-Cheney campaign, which launched its first ad salvo this week, has more than $100 million to spend.

The RNC has complained that though it is no longer allowed to use soft money for campaigning, MoveOn.org is accepting large soft money contributions from a cadre of wealthy donors, including billionaire financier George Soros and film producer Steven Bing, in its quest to defeat the president.

Soros has said ousting Bush this year is now the "central focus of my life.
 
I have mixed feelings about this. One one hand, I think the law is completely ludicrous. But, on the other hand, the Democrats made their bed. Now they can lay in it.:neener:
 
It is merely the first isty-bitsy baby step on the way to galactic scale charlie foxtrot. Control of the airways the last 60 days of the election will place enormous pressure on both parties to control the nature of advertising. They have to start now establishing their positions.

Money from offshore will come into the country and beging hitting the airways. No one will know who sponsors are and where they come from. Philantropic organizations will change their IRS status so they too can get into the mystery ad business.

The IRS has already begun writing rule that bring IRS rules into line with CFR. That means tax exempt organizations will begin to have speech limited. All during the CFR debate we were told only the last 60 days before the election would free political speech be limited. Not so. Now it seems that if you have tax exempt status your speech will be limited.

Just wait for IRS rules to be changed WRT to gun rights organizations.

I predict this election will be the most chaotic we've ever seen because of computer // electronic voting, blood-lust revenge motivation, and baldfaced attempts by incumbants to limit free speech.

And ultimately we get to thank Dubya because of his refusal to do what was right.
 
Politicians are paying hefty fines out of their campaign funds for running afoul of the law.

Many of the folks paying the hundreds of thousands of $ in fines supported McCain Feingold without even reading it.


Serves em right.
 
Whenever you add switches, dials and levers to a machine...

People will start fiddling with them to get what they want out of it.
 
A possibility to consider...

Maybe Bush & the Republicans are doing this to illustrate how bad a law CFR is and how it can be abused so...

A. Congress repeals it.
B. Another CFR suit makes it to SCOTUS--giving them a chance to overturn it.


I WOULD believe that....

...but the Republicrats haven't shown THAT much intelligence and fortitude lately. :banghead:
 
No, actually if you read comment by Bob Barr and others who were involved in the whole mess, you will rapidly see both Democrats and spinelessrepublican knew CFR was bad law and blatantly unconstitutional but both side AND THE FREAKIN' PRESIDENT made the assumption the supreme court would "fix" it. All corners exhibited profound moral cowardice. All corners were dumbfounded at the SCOTUS boner.

And that kiddies may well be the reason Larry Craig and the NRA decided to strangle S.1805.

Never, ever underestimate the effect of moral cowardice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top