Sunday, March 27, 2011

McComish v. Bennett: The Supreme Court Takes On Public Campaign Financing

Tomorrow, the Supreme Court hears arguments in the Arizona public election financing case McComish v. Bennett.  This is the first big campaign financing case since the ludicrous decision in Citizens UnitedMcComish is the big test to see if the Supreme Court will expand their view that money equals speech or if they will pull back from the precipice and allow reasonable restrictions on campaign financing.

I am not holding out much hope for the continuation of the Arizona Clean Elections law.  I have no doubt that the majority in Citizens United will strike down the Arizona Clean Elections law and hand the Republicans and their allies another victory in regards to campaign financing.  They will expand the terrible concept that money equals speech and that the candidate with more money gets more speech.

Maybe its time to introduce the following amendment to the U.S. Constitution:
No group, association or other private legal entity may contribute to any political campaign, only individual citizens of legal voting age and state governments on an equal basis where public financing of campaigns have been enacted.  The states and federal governments may limit campaign contributions for their respective jurisdictions with equal protection for the contributors and campaigns.
I know.  No such amendment is going to be passed in my lifetime, but it never hurts to throw it out there.


  1. The issue in McComish is ONLY whether the election and associated speech should be considered from the perspective of the Arizona voter, NOT the candidates.

    Of course the Clean Elections law matching funds provision "injures" candidates bought and paid for by rich people and corporations. But striking down that provision LIMITS the information available to voters.

    I understand it's a longshot. Fortunately, the ruling will not be issued tomorrow. Really, this is the point that needs to be made and somehow gotten across to the Roberts court.

  2. I think the majority in Citizens United fully understands, they just choose to ignore it and screw the American public. They seem to find ways of doing that in more convoluted ways.


When you comment, please be civil and don't spam.