Penny Arcade Forums› Debate and/or Discourse
As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

RNC to John McCain: Screw you. (Campaign Finance)

seasleepyseasleepy Registered User regular
edited November 2008 in Debate and/or Discourse
So, now that the election's been over all of 9 days, the RNC has decided it's okay to drop the charade that they give a crap about John McCain: they've filed two suits claiming that McCain-Feingold is unconstitutional. The actual suits are in PDFs at that link for folks with legal knowhow, but for those of us who don't:
The RNC Press Release wrote:
WASHINGTON – The Republican National Committee (RNC) today announced it will file lawsuits in the District of Columbia and Louisiana challenging, respectively, the constitutionality of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act's ban on national parties raising and spending non-federal dollars, and the constitutionality of political party coordinated expenditure limits. The RNC does so to defend its interests as a national party committee with varied interests, including both state and federal elections, as well as redistricting and grassroots lobbying. RNC Chairman Robert M. "Mike" Duncan released the following statement today concerning the lawsuits.

"The campaign finance restrictions the RNC today challenged infringe on the First Amendment's core: political speech and association," Duncan said. "The RNC must have the ability to support state candidates, coordinate expenditures with our candidates, and truly engage in political activity on a national level.The RNC has operated under and complied with these provisions of the law since their enactment, and as applied it is unconstitutional."

Ambinder has a summary/analysis here as well.

Basically: "It's hard to campaign without soft money. Let's go suing!"

So, too soon? Too transparent? Too obviously a sign that the party needs some damn reorganization if they can't compete without gobs of money obtained in a shady manner?
Or... is it about damn time someone went after these restrictions on political free speech?

Steam | Nintendo: seasleepy | PSN: seasleepy1
seasleepy on

Posts

  • Options
    AngelHedgieAngelHedgie Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Well, this is yet more evidence that the death of TRMPAC/ARMPAC really hurt the Pubbies. Of course, what really hurt was the fact that because they were giving away (illegal) cash to their neophyte entrants in the 90s and early 2000s, said neophytes never really learned how to campaign and raise money. Which is why the 50 State Strategy was so damn effective.

    AngelHedgie on
    XBL: Nox Aeternum / PSN: NoxAeternum / NN:NoxAeternum / Steam: noxaeternum
  • Options
    JengoJengo Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Heh, that's some world class sour grapes there. Really it just sounds like the RNC is a Scoobie-Doo villian, "I would have won the election if it wasn't for those kids and their blasted campaign finance reform."

    Jengo on
    3DS FC: 1977-1274-3558 Pokemon X ingame name: S3xy Vexy
  • Options
    Salvation122Salvation122 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    McCain-Feingold includes provisions that explicitly disallow candidates to run certain types of ads within a given date of the election, and is the single largest infringement of free political speech since the Alien and Sedition Acts.

    Salvation122 on
  • Options
    MatrijsMatrijs Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Salvation122 wrote: »
    McCain-Feingold includes provisions that explicitly disallow candidates to run certain types of ads within a given date of the election, and is the single largest infringement of free political speech since the Alien and Sedition Acts.

    Only if you believe that money is speech.

    Also, are you referring to the provisions that prevent outside entities from running ads within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election? I'm having difficulty finding the provisions which you suggest would prevent candidates from running certain types of ads.

    Matrijs on
  • Options
    YarYar Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    A political ad isn't money, it's speech.

    Anyway, I think McCain-Feingold is a direct result of the dirty tricks Bush pulled to rip the nomination from McCain in 2000.

    Yar on
  • Options
    PantsBPantsB Fake Thomas Jefferson Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    Yar wrote: »
    A political ad isn't money, it's speech.
    The money collected to run those ads are money. Donating that money to a campaign or accepting that money is not speech but conduct. A candidate can do just about anything he or she wants with their own money.
    Salvation122 wrote: »
    McCain-Feingold includes provisions that explicitly disallow candidates to run certain types of ads within a given date of the election, and is the single largest infringement of free political speech since the Alien and Sedition Acts.

    A) Your knowledge of infringements on free speech seem to have large gaps.
    and
    B) No it doesn't. It prohibits unions and corporations from doing so but not candidates. Neither unions nor corporations have 1st Amendment rights.

    PantsB on
    11793-1.png
    day9gosu.png
    QEDMF xbl: PantsB G+
  • Options
    emp123emp123 Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    PantsB wrote: »
    Yar wrote: »
    A political ad isn't money, it's speech.
    The money collected to run those ads are money. Donating that money to a campaign or accepting that money is not speech but conduct. A candidate can do just about anything he or she wants with their own money.
    Salvation122 wrote: »
    McCain-Feingold includes provisions that explicitly disallow candidates to run certain types of ads within a given date of the election, and is the single largest infringement of free political speech since the Alien and Sedition Acts.

    A) Your knowledge of infringements on free speech seem to have large gaps.
    and
    B) No it doesn't. It prohibits unions and corporations from doing so but not candidates. Neither unions nor corporations have 1st Amendment rights.

    Actually, I think corporations and unions both have limited first amendment rights, but I may be (and probably am) wrong.

    emp123 on
    Steam
  • Options
    ScooterScooter Registered User regular
    edited November 2008
    When it comes to political campaigning, there's already a ton of rules and requirements that you could say infringe free speech.

    Scooter on
Sign In or Register to comment.
Penny Arcade Forums› Debate and/or Discourse