Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

President Signs CFR Act, Statement by the President 3/27/2002
whitehouse ^ | 3/27/2002 | President George W. Bush

Posted on 03/27/2002 6:23:59 PM PST by TLBSHOW

President Signs Campaign Finance Reform Act


Statement by the President

Today I have signed into law H.R. 2356, the "Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002." I believe that this legislation, although far from perfect, will improve the current financing system for Federal campaigns.

The bill reforms our system of financing campaigns in several important ways. First, it will prevent unions and corporations from making unregulated, "soft" money contri-butions -- a legislative step for which I repeatedly have called.

Often, these groups take political action without the consent of their members or shareholders, so that the influence of these groups on elections does not necessarily comport with the actual views of the individuals who comprise these organizations. This prohibition will help to right that imbalance.

Second, this law will raise the decades-old limits on giving imposed on individuals who wish to support the candidate of their choice, thereby advancing my stated principle that election reform should strengthen the role of individual citizens in the political process.

Third, this legislation creates new disclosure requirements and compels speedier compliance with existing ones, which will promote the free and swift flow of information to the public regarding the activities of groups and individuals in the political process.

I long have believed that complete and immediate disclosure of the source of campaign contributions is the best way to reform campaign finance.

These provisions of the bill will go a long way toward fixing some of the most pressing problems in campaign finance today. They will result in an election finance system that encourages greater individual participation, and provides the public more accurate and timely information, than does the present system. All of the American electorate will benefit from these measures to strengthen our democracy.

However, the bill does have flaws. Certain provisions present serious constitutional concerns. In particular, H.R. 2356 goes farther than I originally proposed by preventing all individuals, not just unions and corporations, from making donations to political parties in connection with Federal elections.

I believe individual freedom to participate in elections should be expanded, not diminished; and when individual freedoms are restricted, questions arise under the First Amendment.

I also have reservations about the constitutionality of the broad ban on issue advertising, which restrains the speech of a wide variety of groups on issues of public import in the months closest to an election. I expect that the courts will resolve these legitimate legal questions as appropriate under the law.

As a policy matter, I would have preferred a bill that included a provision to protect union members and shareholders from involuntary political activities undertaken by their leadership.

Individuals have a right not to have their money spent in support of candidates or causes with which they disagree, and those rights should be better protected by law. I hope that in the future the Congress and I can work together to remedy this defect of the current financing structure.

This legislation is the culmination of more than 6 years of debate among a vast array of legislators, citizens, and groups. Accordingly, it does not represent the full ideals of any one point of view.

But it does represent progress in this often-contentious area of public policy debate. Taken as a whole, this bill improves the current system of financing for Federal campaigns, and therefore I have signed it into law.

GEORGE W. BUSH

THE WHITE HOUSE,

March 27, 2002.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: cfr; cfrlist; presidentbush; silenceamerica
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-371 next last
To: TLBSHOW
Then you have fallen into the rats plan. You see I know what their plan is. Do you?

I'm not the one who plans to vote for someone who has signed into law one of the most egregious bills since the Alien and Sedition Act (which was signed into law by Preident JOHN ADAMS).

41 posted on 03/27/2002 7:10:00 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
"Oh please, son. Your party passed this out of the House." I know you didn't address that to me, but,
They certainly are not my party. They passed the Gestapo Law without reading it. I don't know about you, but, this is not the kind of leadership I admire. Alan Keyes gets my vote in 2004.
42 posted on 03/27/2002 7:11:02 PM PST by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Commie Basher
"The last time I voted LP was for Ron Paul in 1988." I went LP in '92 after Bush Sr. lied about his "no new taxes" pledge. Jr. faked me out in 2000, just like his old man did by claiming to be a Reaganite in '88. I try to follow the motto: "Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me." The Bushies each got me once but neither will get me twice.
43 posted on 03/27/2002 7:11:33 PM PST by GoreLoser
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: poet
There's no guarantee the the supremes will overturn this

If they don't then the bill is constitutional and you should have no beef with Bush's principles.

44 posted on 03/27/2002 7:12:10 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: weikel
I appreciate the fact that you are concerned about defending your 1st Amendment rights, but it is just as important, if not more, to protect the right to life for the unborn--the silent voice in America whose Constitutional Rights have fully been taken away.

An Embryo is a human being too and any manipulation of technology used to create human life does not make human life any less human than before.

45 posted on 03/27/2002 7:13:59 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: poet
I don't know about you, but, this is not the kind of leadership I admire. Alan Keyes gets my vote in 2004.

I am confused by your post. Are you saying that you disagree that the RATS base won't need some explanation as to why their speech was shut down by Feingold and Daschle who made sure it got thru the Senate ?

46 posted on 03/27/2002 7:14:48 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: cmotormac44
you sure will have a couple of 'winners' there---and give the whitehouse back to the likes of hillary or algore--what a bunch on 'freerepublic', everyday they are going to do something else depending on who voted for what--maybe all you folks better vote 'demonrat' in '04 and get it all over with---i bet you really didn't make any real difference last time or perhaps never even voted at all--sheeesh

I actually voted for Bush, cmotormouth, believing that the alternative, Al Bore-Joe LIE-berman, would be much worse. I stood outside of Cheney's house in bitter cold weather protesting Gore's hijacking of the election. And this is what happens. Knowing that Bush signed this perversion of the Constitution, I will not make the mistake of voting for him again, nor of voting for you.

47 posted on 03/27/2002 7:16:36 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Commie Basher
most likely just because the lesser of two evils has an "R" after his name. even the lesser of two evils is still evil. come on all you bushtheyoungerites, give us that rah, rah zis bush baaahhh.
48 posted on 03/27/2002 7:17:54 PM PST by IRtorqued
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
"Are you saying that you disagree that the RATS base won't need some explanation as to why their speech was shut down by Feingold and Daschle who made sure it got thru the Senate ?"

We all know why Democrats voted for this bill. Since when had they ever have a firm respect for the U.S. Constitution? What worries most of us here, is why exactly the firm defenders of the Constitution--Republicans, voted for this garbage.

49 posted on 03/27/2002 7:18:19 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
I voted for Bush and now regret it.

The C-Span script doesn't fool anyone. Your previous replies contradict what you claim.

50 posted on 03/27/2002 7:18:28 PM PST by LarryLied
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Tolerance Sucks Rocks
I plan to vote 3rd party (or is it 2nd party?).

I like that line. The blurring of Democrat and Republican principles will be fatal to the Republican party in the near future ( can you say "Whig"? I knew you could) unless the Repubs wake up, which is becoming doubtful given this year's and last year's stellar performances in DC by them.

We differ on the embryo funding. I though Bush had least took a stand on that one. Not the one I would have taken, but at least he took one. On CFR he just plain ducked. Not acceptable.

51 posted on 03/27/2002 7:18:35 PM PST by exit82
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Say what? You can't be serious. Dear God! You completely ignored my comment relative to him standing up for free speech on his own. If the supremes uphold this, then a prior deal has been struck and it will still be a restriction of free speech prior to a time certain of an election.
52 posted on 03/27/2002 7:19:14 PM PST by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
but Bush's staunch conservative base is not as big in numbers as the status-quo of

You are getting closer to realizing that a politician can never be too far from where the majority of the people are. Your disapointment with any politician is merely a symptom of your disapointment with the majority. (Even St. Paul knew this when persuading people to believe in Jesus. He always started where the people were and moved them from there. )

I happen to believe that Bush would move farther right in a heart beat if the population did so but it takes time or a crisis to move people to new thoughts.

Heck if it didn't the gospel would have been preached to all nations in the first year.

53 posted on 03/27/2002 7:21:22 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
Do you really think the incumbents won't get around it. My comment about the "leadership" is about the gutless republicans who are nothing more than a rubber stamp.
54 posted on 03/27/2002 7:22:02 PM PST by poet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
Rebeckie, with your help he may remain or surpass his 2000 total of 98,016 votes.

Keep the cheerleading going..... it is fun to watch.

55 posted on 03/27/2002 7:22:17 PM PST by deport
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: VRWC_minion
If they don't then the bill is constitutional and you should have no beef with Bush's principles.

No, it means that the court failed in its duty to uphold the 9th, 10th, and, more likely than not, the 1st amendments (not to mention Article I, Section 8) via judicial review. Do you really think I'm stupid enough to swallow your bull?

56 posted on 03/27/2002 7:22:33 PM PST by Tolerance Sucks Rocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: LarryLied
"The C-Span script doesn't fool anyone. Your previous replies contradict what you claim."

I know that previous statement sounded cliche', but it was true.

I actually volunteered for Bush while I was helping with other campaigns for the Lake County Illinois Republican Party Headquarters this summer. I was also there when Bush came to Naperville and called Adam Clymer an ***hole.

57 posted on 03/27/2002 7:23:21 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: FreedominJesusChrist
We all know why Democrats voted for this bill. Since when had they ever have a firm respect for the U.S. Constitution?

Except many of their supporters are fervent 1st ammenders. They are not going to be very happy when they wake up and find out they not only were raped they didn't get paid.

58 posted on 03/27/2002 7:24:41 PM PST by VRWC_minion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: deport
"Rebeckie, with your help he may remain or surpass his 2000 total of 98,016 votes. Keep the cheerleading going..... it is fun to watch."

I will keep supporting and helping out candidates that adhere to the U.S. Constitution and have a firm respect for human life. I like Howard Phillips, Alan Keyes, Larry Klayman...all of them--the underdogs of truth.

59 posted on 03/27/2002 7:26:11 PM PST by FreedominJesusChrist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Bush lied to us. During the campaign, he promised to veto this bill. He also took an oath to uphold the Constitution.

He lied on both counts.

He's lost my vote, he will not regain it unless he gets serious about upholding the Constitution.

60 posted on 03/27/2002 7:26:12 PM PST by Mulder
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 361-371 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson