FEC
Posted at 2:41pm on Feb. 15, 2008 Don't like Campaign Finance "Reform?" - Gotta Read This
"No Constitutionally Adequate Justification"
By Brad Smith
Yesterday a group called SpeechNow.org, represented by attorneys from the Center for Competitive Politics and the Institute for Justice, sued the Federal Election Commission in what one prominent campaign finance lawyer calls, "one of the more important and consequential [suits against campaign finance laws] in a long time," and which one supporter of broad campaign speech restrictions admitted is, "pretty brilliant."
There is much more to this suit than I have time to delve into here, but the basic claim is simple - if George Soros and other wealthy millionaires can Constitutionally spend whatever they want on politics, than under the Constitution groups of citizens banding together should also be able to spend whatever they want.
This page has a cornucopia of links to the pleadings in the case, a case "backgrounder," and tons of media links. If you care about free speech in America, check it out.
Note that I am one of the counsel for SpeechNow.org and am Chairman of the Center for Competitive Politics.
Posted in FEC | FEC | First Amendment | mccain-feingold — Comments (7)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 1:29am on Feb. 13, 2008 McCain to FEC: Never Mind
By Neil Stevens
John McCain wrote a letter to the FEC and the Treasury asking them to ignore his previous request to be in the federal matching funds system.
Is this legal? Or is he just making it up as he goes along? I have no idea.
Posted at 11:18am on Jan. 25, 2008 SpeechNow vs. FEC
Can we bar lawyers from the FEC? Please?
By krempasky
Odds are, you've not been following the *other* story at the Federal Election Commission (the primary one being the fact that thanks to Democratic incompetence in the Senate, the FEC doesn't have a quorum. Alas) - the direct challenge to speech limits being driven by SpeechNow.org.
But now they've got some good news: the FEC has released a draft opinion (.pdf) as well as a dissent authored by FEC Chairman Dave Mason (.pdf) (as an aside, the only non-lawyer on the Commission, I believe)
On one hand, Mason's excellent dissent would make an excellent approach to regulation, but even if the FEC weren't crippled by Harry Reid, Barack Obama, and company - I'd have a hard time seeing 4 votes for it.
On the other hand - the draft from the General Counsel may well serve SpeechNow even better. As Bob Bauer puts it,
"Having this draft can’t but help SpeechNow at the next stage in this fight. Apart from having dutifully checked with the agency, the organization can show, further, that the agency has little to say of any interest on the subject but confines itself to defending its statutory turf. The draft gives no sense of the stakes of this confrontation: all of the passion, all of the intellectual energy, is found on the other side, where SpeechNow is found. "
The notion that the support and defense of speech in all its forms (nevermind the most precious speech of all, that driving our politics) should have the upper hand is a very welcome thing indeed.
Posted in Archived | FEC | SpeechNow — Comments (0)/ Email this page » / Read More »
Posted at 9:27am on Jul. 24, 2007 FEC complaint against Kos?
By krempasky
John Bambanek claims that he filed a complaint at the FEC against Markos and the DailyKos. (via NRO) Let's be clear, not only is Bambanek woefully uninformed about the law (didn't we go over this for a whole freaking YEAR?) and its application on the internet, he's even less capable of grasping the concept (and frankly, value) of free speech on the web.
"Some will argue that this is a slippery slope that will snare all bloggers. First, most bloggers aren't organizations. Second, most bloggers are read by like 3 people and their posts are certainly not worth $1,000. Third, most bloggers don't exist for the primary purpose of electing certain people to federal office."
Some will? John, Some did - and damn well successfully, too. The point is not that Markos is effective at his stated goal, it's that the proper environment for politics online is that ANYONE can be effective. There is no inherent advantage of big money, there is no crowding effect that limits someone else's speech.
This complaint is a sorry attempt to use government institutions to silence opponents. I'm almost grateful Bambanek apparently slept from March 2005 through the Summer of 2006, because the stunt has zero chance of success.
Posted in Archived | DailyKos | FEC — Comments (12)/ Email this page » / Read More »
