Posted on 03/25/2002 11:16:37 AM PST by Pay now bill Clinton
Bush Will Sign Campaign Finance Bill
Mon Mar 25,10:19 AM ET
SAN SALVADOR, El Salvador (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) said on Sunday he would sign landmark campaign finance reform legislation with only a slight hesitation, reflecting his ongoing concerns about the measure.
The legislation to reduce the influence of money in politics won final congressional approval last week, and Bush has pledged to sign it soon.
The bill would ban unlimited contributions known as "soft money" to national political parties, limit such donations to state and local parties and restrict broadcast ads by outside groups shortly before elections.
Former independent counsel Kenneth Starr, whose investigation of Bill Clinton's sex life resulted in the president's impeachment in 1998, is to lead a legal challenge that will seek to knock down most of the measure as unconstitutional.
Bush said he felt the campaign bill did not fully address the need to require identification of who is funding so-called independent groups that introduce "scurrilous, untrue" television advertisements in the last days of a campaign, as he said happened to him in his 2000 presidential campaign.
"I've always thought that people who pump money into the political system, we ought to know who they are," he said.
Bush said that nonetheless the "bill is a better bill than the current system," but that some parts of it might not stand up to a court challenge.
How silly of you. Let's stand up and veto it; then we can debate it for the rest of our lives. Not to mention giving the Dems AND the press a huge issue.
The Cato Institute would be a preferable placement for Sir Gawain, IMHO. You know the place where they go through the Constitution and the virtues of marijuana with a fine tooth comb.
I would like to send him some MONEY for his cause!
Invoking the mysterious 'they' is a sure sign of BS.
Quote someone or call the idea your own and show the numbers/details to back it up.
Also, don't care to adress the face saving issue? I thought not.
A "conservative" who screws the constitution with a wink and a smile is of even LESS use to us.
At least those without office are not actively engaged in the destruction of the republic.
He is entitled to an opinion, and can say so, then VETO,
this bill. I bet if you think real hard, you can remember
X42 Vetoing a bill because he thought it was un-constitutional
I will take a wild guess that every president has Vetoed a bill
because he felt it was un-constitutional, whether publicly stated
or not.
I like Bush for the most part, but he is not King, and he is not
the second coming as some on here seem to think.
He is a politician first people
If conservatives work their asses off to get conservatives elected (Simon in CA is a good start), then they can have power to hold politicians' feet to the fire. There's not much roar to conservatives right now because we failed to repudiate Clintoon in 1996 and 2000. We have lost three straight popular votes.
I've seen this mentioned over and over again as though it's fact. I think there is as great a likelihood that Bush will be bashed by the media for his flip-flop on this issue. IOW, he may as well do what's right, since he'll take the heat either way.
I, unlike others, am willing to CONSIDER alternatives.
I hope you're not trying to insult me with that post. lol
You're against the veto?
Ah, that wasn't an ad. That was a whole web site set loaded with lies.
They won't need any steenking money. CFR exempts unions from the speech restrictions imposed on so-called "political" organizations 60 days prior to an election. What? Did you think the unions would let CFR go forward withoug getting a waiver beforehand?
Look at the threads elsewhere here about the way the Dems are fracturing. Down in Florida, the state affiliate of the NEA is collapsing. In New York and elsewhere, the black and Hispanic votes are beginning to fracture. We've got a number of unions that are working with Bush to open ANWR, and the Dems are sticking with the environmentalists on this. That's not going to just drive the rank-and-file. We're talking the Teamsters, Steel Workers, and other union organizations migrating or staying neutral.
The "Reagan Democrats" who went with Reagan in 1980 and 1984, Bush Sr. in 1988, returned to Clinton for 1992 and 1996, then split evenly between Bush and Gore in 2000 are about to break to the GOP, and this time the migration could be permanent.
The Dems are close to collapse. If we can hold on, and if we can outlast them, we could put them down the tubes for good. I see no reason why we should not get 25% of the black vote by 2008, or 50-55% of the Hispanic vote by that year. We have a chance to put the Dems in the minority for good. We can't afford to blow it.
It's really something isn't it?
I can remember a time, not all that long ago when someone with an argument like:
"Well, Bill Clinton isn't responsible for signing Unconstitutional laws. It's not his job to veto them. That's all for the Supreme Court to decide, Congress and the President have nothing to say about it."
would have been run out of here on a rail.
It's really dissapointing how some Freepers would gamble our Right's to keep their boy (and those in Congress who supported CFR, Dubya didn't do this alone. There is plenty of blame to go around.)from looking "bad" in the press for Defending our First Amendment.
It's so incredibly dissapointing.
I swear, it's like listening to James Carville himself.
And, if the SC screws up and doesn't throw it out.. (it has happened before)
Bet on a big "see, I told you so" party here on FR, to celebrate our loss of speech. They will actually be HAPPY if this makes it through the SC unhindered.
So long as it doesn't taint the golden child, then all is well.
Sure, but it is up to the president, or two thirds of the vote in
both houses to decide what becomes a law in the first place.
Where did he say anything about a website?
Sounds like something Murrymom would say.
Nope just making a suggestion. :^)
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.