Posted on 03/27/2002 4:03:29 PM PST by rightwing2
Bush Signs Campaign Finance Bill; NRA Sues
NewsMax.com Wires
Thursday, March 28, 2002
WASHINGTON President Bush on Wednesday signed campaign finance legislation that restricts speech and bans unregulated donations to political parties. "I believe that this legislation, although far from perfect, will improve the current financing system for federal campaigns," Bush said in a statement. The measure immediately drew legal challenges. Within a short time of Bush's signing, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., had filed suit, as had National Rifle Association. Both denounced the law's infringement on freedom of speech. The law "eviscerates the core protections of the First Amendment by prohibiting, on pain on criminal punishment, political speech," said a legal complaint filed on behalf of NRA and its political victory fund. "We are proud to be one of the first plaintiffs to formally ask the federal court to invalidate these new limits on the political speech of ordinary citizens because we believe that this law cannot be allowed to stand, not even for a moment," stated Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the gun rights group. Bush signed the bill as he traveled to Greenville, S.C., and Atlanta to talk with emergency workers and on campaign fund-raising jaunts for Reps. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., and Saxby Chamblis, R-Ga.
The U.S. Senate approved the legislation on March 20 on a 60-40 vote that came hours after a last-ditch attempt to filibuster the bill. It was an identical version of the measure passed in February by the U.S. House of Representatives, avoiding a conference committee that could have been used to kill the bill. The campaign finance bill was sponsored by Sens. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., and John McCain, R-Ariz. Upon learning Bush signed the bill, McCain issued a statement saying, "I'm pleased that President Bush has signed campaign finance reform legislation into law."
'I May Hesitate'
While traveling through El Salvador on Sunday, Bush joked with reporters about placing his name on the bill once it arrived at the White House: "It will probably take about three seconds to get to the W, I may hesitate on the period, and then rip through the Bush." The law bans unlimited contributions, known as "soft money," to national political parties and restricts issue ads aired by interest groups before elections. Bush had called the measure "flawed" but had said he would sign it. "I wouldn't have signed it if I was really unhappy with it. I think it improves the system," Bush told reporters during a stop at Greenville firehouse. "And it improves the system because it enables an individual to give more money. And I want to do is have a system that encourages more individual participation, as well as more disclosure." Still, he said, he had been concerned about a system where money was given to entities and stakeholders had no say. He said he was concerned mostly about corporate shareholders and labor union members not having the ability to object to how their money was being spent. However, although no one is required to buy stock in any company, many workers must pay union dues to have a job.
Opponents of the bill, such as McConnell, say the new law represents an unconstitutional limit to political speech. They note that limiting political advertising by non-affiliated groups will protect incumbents, further empower the media and remove the ability of citizens to band together over common political causes. McCain said last week the scandal surrounding bankrupt Enron Corp., and revelations that the energy trader had donated money to 72 of 100 senators and had pushed electric supply and commodities deregulation though the U.S. Capitol and state houses, helped the cause. Copyright 2002 by United Press International.
All rights reserved.
11 Senate RINOS voted for it, two Democrats voted against.
41 House RINOs voted for it, 12 Democrats voted against it. And the vote was another of those middle of the night abortions, the vote being held at 2:42 AM.
it's still there...DOH!
The only way to do that, sad to say, is for the Supremes to kill it AFTER it has been made law.
That doesn't stop Congress from passing it again either, as they did with the gun free school zones business. The SC told them schools were not commerce, let alone interstate commerce, but they just added a little more interstate commerce pixie dust in the "findings" and passed it again. They'll do the same with this. In fact in some sense this is passing something again after the Courts found the previous incarnation, with some of the same provisions, unconsitutional. Not as blatent as with the unarmed victims zone thing, but no different in principal.
Thanks El Gato, I didn't think the thread starter had a clue.
In fact he just out smarted the rats and it is the rats that will pay dearly.
I think I understand the "practical" side of what's going on here but I think when core values are challenged you have to be a leader and "above the fray". Certainly we cannot depend on the Dasholes for anything good and maybe this is a "smart" move but it stinks to high heaven. We no longer hold the high moral ground when we demonstrate that we can be compromised just like the Toon.
"At First Blush" this looks BAD!
He (& we) is dealing with a plethora of conflicting interests here.
I'll give him a temporary, qualified pass--& wait a while.
He's mostly "Done us proud" so far--& he KNOWS the horrific "Downside" to the bill he signed.
I'm going to give this issue a bit of time to develop; I think there's more here than we know.
I still trust the man--he's "done the right thing so far---"
Doc
You really think they would repeat this bill ? They would raise the hard money limits even higher in trade for a ban that gets shot down by the SC ? Also, you don't think the liberal Rats don't have some splaining to do with their own base when they wake up to the fact thier own voices are silenced ?
As it is 60 days before an election depending on Dan, Peter, and Tom certainly would make Palm Beach County voters punching ballot chads look easy. I might as well just be blindfolded and punch anywhere on the ballot since according to Bush, the Senate and House I don't deserve the right that our Constitution protects to have the pros and cons of campaign issues and candidates aired in the arena of ideas.
What a marvelous snafu for the incumbents. Welcome back Nero, the greedy politicians are making everything very comfortable for you.
How many times since last January has Bush lost your vote ? Just curious.
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.