Turn Off Ads?
Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Congress and the War on Free Speech

  1. #1
    Smells Like Teen Spirit jmcclain19's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    6,490

    Congress and the War on Free Speech

    Read this column this morning, thought it made some excellent points and wanted to pass it along.

    I don't agree with everything in it, especially the last sentence, but I find it disappointing of late, the Republican Party's abandoment of Free Speech and the First Amendment as a crucial tenent of who they are and this column touches on that.

    Back in the 90's, the GOP had two high ranking conservative House members, Bob Barr and Dick Armey, who were tireless defenders of Free Speech. So much so, that when both retired in recent years, they have gone on to work for the ACLU. Armey rose up high enough to be the House Majority Leader.

    It's actually saddens me to see the Free Speech debate essentially falling along party lines of late, with both sides seemingly inept at understanding the complexities or nuances involved in the First Amendment. Especially in wartime, folks in both parties seem to be to close to the forest to see the trees.

    http://www.techcentralstation.com/021005H.html

    The War on Speech

    By Ryan Sager

    The war on free speech continues in Congress. The crew that did its darndest to repeal the First Amendment back in 2002 -- Sens. John McCain and Russ Feingold and Reps. Chris Shays and Marty Meehan - is back, and now its looking to clean up the mess left by the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act.


    That mess: insidious "527" groups, like MoveOn.org's Media Fund and the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, of course.



    The problem, it seems, is that there are still just too darn many independent groups allowed to go shooting their mouths off about any darn thing any darn time they want -- and they can accept pretty much any amount of money from pretty much anyone.



    There should be a law.



    And there will be, since free-speech looks to have no defenders left in Congress. In 2002 some conservative stalwarts --people who believed that money and speech couldn't be distinguished, since it takes money to make speech heard -- tried to hold out against the McCain-Feingold mania to get money out of politics.



    But this time there are far fewer brave souls.



    Last week, a bill was introduced in the Senate that would force 527s to register with the Federal Election Commission and restrict the groups' ability to raise and spend money.



    The bill enjoys the support of Trent Lott, who had been one of 41 senators to vote against McCain-Feingold. Now, however, he's decided that any money given by wealthy individuals is "sewer money."



    And why is this money so dirty suddenly?



    "It was an unintended consequence of McCain-Feingold. Instead of going to the parties, rich people are putting money into these 527s in the dark of night," Lott told the Sun Herald in Biloxi, Miss.



    In other words, some of those rich people might be trying to throw out incumbents.



    McCain is even more blatant about the incumbent-protection angle. As The Washington Times reported last week, "McCain said lawmakers should support the bill out of self-interest, because it would prevent a rich activist from trying to defeat an incumbent by directing money into a political race through a 527 organization."



    "That should alarm every federally elected member of Congress," McCain said.



    Indeed, it certainly does.



    In the House, Bob Ney, an Ohio Republican and chairman of the House Administration committee, who opposed campaign-finance reform in 2002, also seems ready to roll over.



    The magic trick that reformers have managed to perform here is really something to behold. They've turned citizens into numbers.



    A 527 is nothing more than a group of Americans who have banded together -- 5 of them, 27 of them, 527 of them or 10,000 of them - to criticize their elected leaders, or candidates for office, and to share the costs of doing so.



    But by calling these people by a number, they can be made to sound shadowy and devious.



    The speech 527 groups engage in is fundamental to the First Amendment, yet it is exactly this speech -- not the influence behind it -- that is being targeted by Congress. So much for "Congress shall make no law…"



    527s already are barred from engaging in "express advocacy," urging the election or defeat of one candidate or another. Furthermore, the groups are banned from coordinating with candidates.



    So where is there any possibility of corruption?



    The fact is that there is no threat of corruption -- which is supposed to be the fundamental motivating logic behind all of our campaign-finance laws -- from any of these organizations.



    But having already moved from fighting corruption to fighting the appearance of corruption, now our campaign-finance laws are being tailored to the goal that all groups that might effect the outcome of a national election must be on an equal footing with one and other.



    It's a self-perpetuating logic that will have no end.



    For now, Congress is only attacking 527s. But it won't be long before every other type of non-profit group that does work related to politics comes under the gun.



    America's experiment with campaign-finance reform should never have been started. And now there may be no way to stop it. President Bush passed up his opportunity to stop it back in 2002 -- though he admitted at the time he thought the law was unconstitutional. The Supreme Court, in turn, punted on the issue and let an atrocity against our Constitution stand.



    Worst of all, Congress will never have any incentive to set things right Given the tools to protect themselves, its members have precious little reason ever to cede any ground to those rambunctious democratic forces who have the temerity to wish to criticize them.



    All that can be hoped is that a newly constituted Supreme Court -- perhaps, dare one dream, headed by Chief Justice Scalia -- will make an abrupt U-turn.

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #2
    Big Red Machine RedsBaron's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Out Wayne
    Posts
    22,888

    Re: Congress and the War on Free Speech

    I totally agree with that article. I was disappointed but not surprised that Congress passed the McCain-Feingold Act; I was extremely disappointed that Bush signed it into law; and I was extremely disappointed and surprised that the Supreme Court upheld it.
    "Hey...Dad. Wanna Have A Catch?" Kevin Costner in "Field Of Dreams."

  4. #3
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Bush Leagues
    Posts
    9,245

    Re: Congress and the War on Free Speech

    Now Scaife has some competition and the GOP cries "fowl". I'd much prefer public financing/free airtime to McCain/Feingold but in the iterim I'll support what I can get. Free speech isn't an absolute (fire in theaters). That argument I always thought a little specious.

    However, let the 527's go at it. I think that's a good result of McCain/Feingold. Let the money flow to outside agitators instead of party coffers.
    The widow is gathering nettles for her children's dinner; a perfumed seigneur, delicately lounging in the Oeil de Boeuf, hath an alchemy whereby he will extract the third nettle and call it rent. ~ Carlyle

  5. #4
    Rally Onion! Chip R's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    34,520

    Re: Congress and the War on Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by Rojo
    Now Scaife has some competition and the GOP cries "fowl".
    They want chickens?
    The Rally Onion wants 150 fans before Opening Day.

    http://www.facebook.com/pages/Rally-...24872650873160

  6. #5
    Please come again pedro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    portland, oregon
    Posts
    14,747

    Re: Congress and the War on Free Speech

    Quote Originally Posted by Chip R
    They want chickens?
    I think chickens are just the type of bi-partisan issue that dems and repubs can build a bridge over the greens with.
    Get your nunchucks and the keys to your dad's car. I know where we can get a gun

  7. #6
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    The Bush Leagues
    Posts
    9,245

    Re: Congress and the War on Free Speech

    D'oh!
    The widow is gathering nettles for her children's dinner; a perfumed seigneur, delicately lounging in the Oeil de Boeuf, hath an alchemy whereby he will extract the third nettle and call it rent. ~ Carlyle


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25