Commentary is rolling in on the WRTL decision... Rick Hassen has predicted that the corporate and union money will flood the 2008 election because of this ruling. Possible? I think so... but let's also remember that as sweeping of a ruling this is (essentially, the Court said if there's a reasonable interpretation that an ad is NOT influencing an election, it can't be regulated by BCRA... that's pretty broad), advertisements will still have to facially be about something other than elections. It's interesting that the Court ruled in a manner that went well beyond what WRTL was asking for... but that might be a bigger picture issue related to the new Court members.
Are we back to a pre-BCRA world for nonprofits who wish to advocate in and around election season? I'd argue it hasn't rolled back that far, but suffice to say that this ruling certainly reshuffles the deck in the constant struggle between our values of free speech and the right to express viewpoints (whether from corporations or not) versus our values of controlling campaign finance to limit the perception of corruption. This time, it seems, the Court has swung the pendulum back to the notion that we as a country would rather filter through the speech rather than limit the expression through campaign finance limitations.
One thing is clear. This debate has raged for over 31 years, and shows no signs of ebbing.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment