West Virginia Blue
The Best Blogging Community in West Virginia
Democratic politics, progressive policies, the good life and free living in Wild, Wonderful West Virginia.
Big Daddy Sen. Robert C. Byrd

WHAT ARE WV REPUBLICANS TRYING TO HIDE: GOP AGAINST CAMPAIGN FINANCE DISCLOSURE

by: Jeremiah

Fri Jun 27, 2008 at 16:53:39 PM EDT


( - promoted by Clem Guttata)

The campaign disclosure bill is the hot issue during this summer's Special Session.  The legislation was drafted in response to a recent US District Court ruling throwing out part of the 2005 campaign finance law.  The law required independent groups to disclose funding sources when campaigning with television, print and radio.  In the lawsuit, the Virginia based and conservative leaning Center for Individual Freedom sued the state, claiming the law violated First Amendment rights.  In response, US District Judge Faber issued a preliminary injunction allowing issue-only advertisements.  The ruling also stated that donor names were not required for campaigning that involved telephone banks, fliers, faxes, mass mailings, and other print media.  

Many policy makers felt it absolutely necessary that something be done to fill the hole in election law created by the ruling.  The Governor's call for a special session to freeze the gas tax increase, transfer the teacher retirement fund and allocate supplemental budget funds to various programs offered the perfect opportunity to address this issue before the upcoming general election.  

When drafting the campaign disclosure bill had to take into consideration the courts ruling which indicated that there was no legislative evidence as to why print speech should be disclosed during elections.  To respond to this, House Democrats retooled this section of the code and inserted legislative findings about why such media is effective and why it should be made public.  

The final draft of the bill basically stated that those publishing certain print media, including that advocating for or against a candidate or print media that ties a candidate to an issue in some capacity, must disclose both their name and the amount of money they spent with the Secretary of State's Office- the SOS will then make this information available to the public.    

After successfully passing the House Judiciary Committee, the bill was delayed on the floor by Republicans who felt they needed more time to flesh out the issue.  In order to delay the vote, GOPers voted down the Democrats attempt to suspend House Rules, which is the usual course of action on Special Session legislation.  This move required the bill to be read on three separate days as opposed to just the one day.  

The Charleston Gazette and others criticized the GOP for this move but I felt it was fair given the level of debate surrounding the legislation.  Too often the legislative branch pushes through bills without scrutinizing the content, ie the USA PATRIOT Act at the Federal level.  Once all was said and done, everyone had a chance to look at the bill, draft amendments and craft their argument for or against.    

However, the Republican desire to kill the legislation was a poorly masked attempt to make it a viable campaign tactic to assassinate the characters of those running for office from the murky shadows with undeclared amounts of money.  The Republican claim that this legislation infringes upon free speech and is therefore unconstitutional is absurd.  The Bill of Rights protects our speech but does not protect corporations spending millions of dollars to alter the outcomes of elections.  Truth be told, when corporate special interests and millionaire robber barons flood the election with their gobs of money they drown out the speech of average folks.  It is absolutely essential that a democracy allow the voices of all to be heard and not just those with the money to overwhelm the media market.

In fact, many of those same House Republicans claiming that this legislation was about protecting the sanctity of the constitution supported an amendment by Delegate Cowles that would have exempted three specific groups (the NRA, Right to Life, and WV Farmers) from confines of the bill- a move that would have flew blatantly in the face of the equal protection clause of the US Constitution.  Hypocrisy compounded by poor arguments and questionable motives are the true reason why the Republican Party is a joke in the state of West Virginia.  

So if you are against your elections being bought by unnamed corporate stooges with out of state dollars then let the GOP know with your vote this fall.  Vote Blue!

Jeremiah :: WHAT ARE WV REPUBLICANS TRYING TO HIDE: GOP AGAINST CAMPAIGN FINANCE DISCLOSURE
Tags: , , , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Research (0.00 / 0)
I've been doing literally a full day's worth of research on this issue.  I have a bit more to do and some questions for some folks who are more knowledgeable than myself in this area.  Although, I should be a campaign finance law expert by Tuesday.

Research I've done to this point indicates that HB 219 still may not meet the requirements of Buckley v. Valeo as seen through the eyes of BCRA, McConnell, and Wisconsin Right to Life (all federal cases) and the decision in CFIF v. Ireland, et al.

Like I said, I'm not done with my research yet.  I'll keep you updated.  But I think I should probably get a law degree after this is over.


Vic Sprouse is in full blown (4.00 / 1)
Whiny Ass Titty Baby Mode.

Shorter Vic Sprouse" "Wah. If we can't buy the election, we can't win. Wah!"

Maybe Greear should have hired a grownup to manage his campaign.

Somebody go change Vic's diaper. He's soiled himself again.


When a man embarks upon a crime, he is morally guilty of any other crime which may spring from it. Sherlock Holmes.


Sprouse the Mouse (4.00 / 1)
I am counting down the days to when this douche is no longer in the Senate.

[ Parent ]
Austin v Mich COC (4.00 / 1)
Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce- Allows limiting spending by corporations and unions on grounds that such spending can have corrosive effects on elections and can create the appearance that wealth determines election results.

I'd personally add that the integrity of our elections is fundamental to the health of our democracy. If we allow shadow campaigns with undisclosed spending capacities to overwhelm our electoral process then we risk creating a dangerous drop in the confidence of American citizens in not just our elections but in the day to day functionality of the US government.


Premium Advertiser

blog advertising is good for you

Welcome!

( Home )
Menu

Click here to join!

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


About
- About WVaBlue.com
- Send us news at wvablue@gmail.com
-  Subscribe in a reader

Advertisers


Support WVaBlue

Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Search




Advanced Search


Current CO2 level in the atmosphere

Proudly displaying the West Virginia Red, White, Blue, Green and Orange.

Join me at http://www.350.org


WVa Democrats
  • Sen. Jay Rockefeller
  • Sen. Joe Manchin III
  • Joe Manchin for Senate (2010/2012)
  • Rep. Nick Rahall (WV-03)
  • Secretary of State Natalie Tennant
  • Auditor Glen Gainer
  • Treasurer John Perdue
  • Agriculture Commissioner Gus Douglass
  • Attorney General Darrell V. McGraw
  • Senate President Earl Ray Tomblin, acting as Gov.
  • Declared Candidates
  • Jeff Kessler
  • John Perdue
  • Natalie Tennant
  • Earl Ray Tomblin
  • Rick Thompson

  • Copyright 2011 West Virginia Blue
    Site content may be used for any purpose without explicit permission unless otherwise specified.
    This site exists thanks to financial support from BlogPAC, dedicated volunteers and participation by members of this community. The views expressed at West Virginia Blue belong solely to their respective authors.
    Powered by: SoapBlox