Controversial Campaign Financing Ruling

SeaMax News ^ | 9/28/2005 | Robert Demick

[Milltownmalbay]

The Florida Division of Elections issued a five page legal opinion on September 21 that has many people worried about the future on campaign financing in the state, according to the Miami Herald.

The opinion stated that third-party groups can contribute an unlimited amount of money to a campaign to be used in the mass media, with the only stipulation being that the campaign advertisements can not explicitly tell the voter how to vote.

Last year, after a United States Supreme Court ruling upheld federal restrictions on campaign financing, Florida state legislators passed a law requiring third-party groups to report their finances to the state. This laid the seeds for the recent opinion of the Division of Elections because this law also removed the provision that stated that the third-party groups could not coordinate their ads with the candidates that they favor.

The need for a binding legal decision was augmented by the Florida Elections Commission’s inability to make unwavering decisions on the applicability of the “magic words” test, which decides if ads can be allowed based on whether or not the ads openly tell constituents how to vote. When Ron Saunders, a 2004 Republican Senate candidate, filed a complaint against People for Fairness and Equality, which sent out tons of mail that attacked Saunders, the commission voted down the complaint because the ads did not expressly support a candidate, but in a similar case, the commission took a different view.

The legal opinion was issued by director of the Division of Elections Dawn Roberts, who stated that third-party groups were not limited in the amount of money they could contribute as long as the ads pass the “magic words” test. This ruling has disconcerted both Democrats and Republicans, who both feel that the new ruling undermines Florida’s previous laws.

Mark Herron, an election attorney who advises the Florida Democratic Party said, “There are no practical limits to Florida’s campaign finance laws.” Ellyn Bogdanoff, a Republican member of the House of Ethics and Elections Committee, said, “I think we need to give the public what they want. Nobody wants to stop communication, but what they don’t want are unwarranted last-minute attacks.” One popular solution includes legislators revisiting the 2004 law.

[pennconservative]

Campaign finance laws are an un-Constitutional restriction on free speech. I should be able to give as much money as I want, to whoever I want, whenever I want.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Campaign finance is such an easy thing to accomplish, until you get the politicians involved.

1. Term limits - Two terms max.
2. No joining a lobbyist group for 5 years after leaving ofice.
3. No accepting campaign money outside of your home state.
4. No accepting foreign campaign contributions.
5. Rip up everyones voter cards and make the entire country re-register to vote.
6. No PACS. You can either give money to the DNC for distribution or to the Candidate, not both.

Wow. That was pretty simple. Now get it on the national ballot in 2006. Oh, it would also kill the RAT party.

[pennconservative]

3. No accepting campaign money outside of your home state.

So I move out of Pennsylvania, and I'm not allowed to give to Pennsylvania politicians? Presidential candidates can only raise money in their own states? So the rest of the country that will be effected by the Presidency is unable to participate entirely? Even Congressmen and Senators have drastic effects on the rest of us. Sorry, but this a limitation on political speech, the most protected speech that we have.