This Is Total BS- Election Laws

[HDPM]

Check this out. web page (http://www.thehill.com/news/062404/moore.aspx)


I have always opposed the McCain Feingold campaign finance crap, and here is a perfect example. I am really upset at the republicans pushing for censorship here. Because decent republicans fought campaign reform because they knew groups like the NRA or others would be muzzled. Well, now Moore is going after Bush. Moore is an idiot, but meet the substance, or lack of it, in his film. This is total crap. The First Amendment doesn't exist if this sticks. The Supreme Court was wrong. Maybe they will shift some when they see the totalitarian effect of this idiotic law. Maybe not. This sucks though.

[MMMMMM]

I agree with you, HDPM.

I also seem to recall that certain posters on this board argued in defense of the McCain-Feingold law when we debated the subject some time ago, claiming it was not necessarily an infringement of free speech but rather a means to ensure the fairness of free speech--or some such baloney. Guaranteed those same folks will probably be aghast now if this sticks.

[Utah]

I dont see where it says in the article that republicans are pushing for this. It said the general counsel of FEC is. Am I missing something?

The law might be stupid - but unfortunately it is the law. I think every single law that limits speech in any way (even screaming "fire" in a crowded theater) is a pure and simple violation of the 1st amendment which contains zero ambiguity.

[elwoodblues]

A true literal reading of the First Amendment would allow the FCC, for example, to limit whatever speech it wanted. The Federal Election commission could set up rules limiting the speech of candidates. It would allow judges to create common law rules limiting speech in various ways. All would be okay because of the first word in the first amendment.

[AndysDaddy]

This is rediculus, of course. The FEC, given its powers by Congress, is therefor an agent of Congress. As such it is bound by the first amendment just as Congress itself.

On an unrelated topic, based on a reading of the third amendment, a law could be passed requiring me to house soldiers. Why isn't this cost-saving technique being investigated?