McCain-Feingold and the U.S. Supreme Court

First, let me apologize for not posting. We were out of town for a few days and I'm playing catch-up.

Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law was hurtful to citizen groups and was a violation of the first amendment.

This is a tremendous victory for the cause of free speech!

Wisconsin Right to Life challenged the law because of provisions stating that groups can't air the name of a candidate within 30 days of a primary and 60 days of a general election. Ads that included the name of a candidate didn't have to be election oriented-- they could have been concerning legislation and contacting members of Congress on pro-life issues but the campaign reform law did not discriminate between the types of communication.

Of course, presidential candidate and author of the bill, John McCain, was disappointed but presidential candidate Mitt Romney hailed the ruling saying that the free-speech rights of pro-life and other citizen groups should not be abridged.

In a statement, Romney said, "The law trampled the basic right of the American people to participate in their democracy. Today's decision restores, in part, to the American people a right critical to their freedom of political participation and expression."

McCain-Feingold

As I write this, attorneys are arguing their points on McCain-Feingold before the U.S. Supreme Court.

When McCain-Feingold was being argued in Congress, proponents poo-pooed assertions that the legislation would curb free-speech on issue ads that ran before an election or primary. Groups like National Right to Life and the James Madison Center for Free Speech argued that the language of the bill would hurt citizen groups interested in promoting or criticizing legislators by name when it came to pending legislative issues.

Of course after McCain-Feingold passed this is exactly what happened.

In the article I mentioned yesterday, James Bopp, Jr., who is lead counsel for Wisconsin Right to Life in today's appearance before the Court, wrote:

In 2002, Congress adopted the McCain-Feingold campaign-finance law. As part of this new law, Congress prohibited corporations and labor unions from running 'electioneering communications' — i.e., advertisements naming a candidate, including incumbent officeholders seeking reelection, broadcast to the candidate’s constituents — within 30 days of a primary or 60 days of a general election. Touted as necessary to eliminate 'sham' issue ads that were really intended to elect or defeat a candidate, it is now apparent that the story of McCain-Feingold is itself replete with shams. This so-called “electioneering communication” prohibition is simply the latest permutation of the ancient and persistent impulse of government officials to quash criticism of their actions.

This is what is before our highest Court: can we as citizens criticize our leaders? I think our Founding Fathers are rolling over in their graves that this is even in question.

McCain-Feingold Goes to Court

Tomorrow, oral arguments will be heard in FEC v. Wisconsin Right to Life. There is an excellent article detailing the problems with McCain-Feingold on the National Review website. The article is by James Bopp, Jr. who is lead counsel for Wisconsin Right to Life and is general counsel for the James Madison Center for Free Speech.

McCain-Feingold is a serious curb on the free-speech rights of us all. Please check out Mr. Bopp's article.