Posted on 12/10/2003 4:09:39 PM PST by churchillbuff
JAPAN TODAY March 28, 2002 ATLANTA — U.S. President George Bush quietly signed what he called a flawed law to reform political fund-raising on Wednesday and then set off on a blitz to raise some $3.5 million for fellow Republicans.
Bush praised the law's ban on the unlimited contributions known as "soft money" to national political parties but he questioned its limits on outside political advertising and its failure to protect union members and company shareholders from having their money spent on politics without their consent.
In a sign of his misgivings about the bill, the broadest overhaul of U.S. campaign finance laws in a quarter century, Bush chose to sign it into law privately in the Oval Office without the fanfare the White House typically arranges for such events.
Sen. Mitch McConnell, a Kentucky Republican and ardent foe of the measure, filed suit moments after the president signed the largely Democratic-basked legislation, arguing that it violates the constitutional right to freedom of speech.
The president said he saw no irony in signing the bill into law and then collecting political cash for Republican U.S. Senate candidates in South Carolina, Georgia and Texas in an aggressive two-day fund-raising swing through the South.
"I'm not going to lay down my arms," Bush said, saying he would abide by the rules of the new law, which does not go into effect until the day after the Nov 5 election in which he hopes to wrest control of the Senate from the Democrats.
"These Senate races are very important for me. I want the Republicans to take control of the Senate," he told reporters in Greenville, South Carolina. "These are the rules and that's why I am going to campaign for like-minded people."
Bush aims to erase the Democrats' one-seat edge in the Senate, which has stymied much of his domestic agenda.
"I want Lindsey Graham elected," Bush told donors at a Greenville, South Carolina, event expected to bring in about $1 million for the congressman running for retiring Republican Sen. Strom Thurmond's U.S. Senate seat from South Carolina, and for other Republicans. "Frankly it's in my interest that he get elected because I've got a lot I want to do."
Later, Bush hoped to raise $1.5 million for Republicans including Rep. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia, campaigning to face Democratic Sen. Max Cleland, and more than $1 million on Thursday for Texas Attorney General John Cornyn's bid for the seat being vacated by retiring Republican Sen. Phil Gramm.
In a time-honored tradition, the White House scheduled official events at each stop — in this case arranging for the president to meet firemen and police who cope with catastrophes like the Sept 11 attacks — thereby making the federal government pay for the bulk of his travel costs rather than the candidates.
The campaign finance law, passed after a seven-year struggle in Congress, bans unlimited "soft money" to national political parties, which have raked in hundreds of millions of dollars in such cash in recent years.
In addition, the law sharply limits such contributions to state and local political parties, restricts broadcast ads by outside groups shortly before elections and doubles to $2,000 the amount of highly regulated "hard money" contributions to individual congressional and presidential candidates.
In a written statement, Bush praised some of the law's provisions, including the "soft money" limits, the increased individual contribution limit and new disclosure requirements saying they would "go a long way toward fixing some of the most pressing problems in campaign finance today."
But Bush said he would have preferred a bill that included paycheck protection — a provision to protect union members and company shareholders from "involuntary political activities" undertaken by their leadership.
"The bill does have flaws," the president said, adding that he expected the courts to resolve "legitimate legal questions" about the constitutionality of its broad ban on issue advertising.
Both parties remain unsure who would benefit politically in the new world of campaign finance, but supporters contend that the law will help curb big donors from effectively buying access to the halls of power where they can sway lawmakers.
Campaign finance reform gained momentum earlier this year with the collapse of energy giant Enron Corp, which critics say lavished contributions on both Republicans and Democrats to gain access to Capitol Hill and influence policy.
The law's most ardent congressional proponent was Sen. John McCain, the maverick Arizona Republican who made the issue a centerpiece of his losing run against Bush for the Republican presidential nomination in the 2000 election. They other key advocate in the Senate was Sen. Russell Feingold, a Wisconsin Democrat. (Compiled from wire reports)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Supreme Court is not the final arbitrator of the Constitution. That role is ours. "We, the People". The Owners of this here franchise.
I hope you are correct. I raised some points in #120 to consider.
On a side note. Thanks for all of your work.
5.56mm
In that regard your "who are they" comment is an Ickesian disingenuosity.
Jim, can you offer some words of hope that the CFR law will be reversed?
I would hate to think that this abomination of a law is permenant.
In other words, there are two new parties: The Socialist Democrats and the Liberal Republicans.
Yep. *sigh*
But who? Who exempts Mr. Bush from any honest rebuke? I don't agree that there are "plenty" of such freepers, at least not without elaboration.
And remember, this was my original question. Who are they?
In that regard your "who are they" comment is an Ickesian disingenuosity.
To ask the simple, straightforward question "Who are they?" of someone who paints with a wide-brush and vaguely refers to some unspecified, caricatured group of people is an "Ickesian disingenuosity"?
Again, here was my question: Who are they?
It's a perfectly fair question, one would think.
What I was referring to is your assertion that it is important to get Republicans elected to Congress and the Senate, regardless of their ideology. As long as they are Republicans we'll take them.
You're still sticking to that, huh? After CFR and the new entitlement and the biggest increase in government in the history of this country?
Who needs Democrats when we have our party?
There is HOPE.
I disagree, of course.
No "error" here. This is entirely consistent with the rest of his behavior. Do the liberal, totalitarian, socialist things, then fart some excuses at the right, to smooth them over.
Bush's purpose is to shut "conservatives" up while the liberal, totalitarian, socialist NWO agenda is implemented.
It isn't so. I plan on skipping the presidential part of the ballot.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.