Wednesday, September 30, 2009
The Supreme Court in the past has ruled that money is free speech.
This relates to the First Amendment of the Constitution that protects free speech.
The Supreme Court had ruled that if campaign finance laws restricted the expenditure of money for campaigns it was somehow restricting free speech. Candidates and the rest of the world should be allowed to receive and spend money without restriction if it is being used to speak to the voters.
For example it would include all media including newspapers, television and radio.
The laws relating to campaign finance has been moving in the other direction. McCain (yes, that McCain) Feingold says that campaign finance should be limited to restrict people and organizations from "buying" candidates and elections.
The Supreme Court is once again reviewing the laws relating to campaign finance and indications are that they might throw out all restrictions.
That means that we can expect to watch two years of TV campaign ads instead of the normal one year. This will be a major windfall for the media and lobbyists in general.
I truly have mixed emotions about this one. I believe that the constitution should be followed as closely as possible but by the same token I am against multi-billionaires and corporations from "buying" a candidate and an election.
I guess time will tell.