Herman Cain correctly predicated a “left-wing hissy fit.” McCain doesn’t disappoint
In a major victory for the First Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court on Wednesday struck down a federal law limiting how much money a citizen may contribute to political campaigns during an election cycle. The limitation was initially imposed in 1971 and reworked several times before it was overhauled by the McCain/Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.
Yes. That McCain.
The Court’s five-to-four decision in McCutcheon v. FEC (read here) removes the 1971 limit on political speech.
Chief Justice John Roberts wrote, “There is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders. Money in politics may at times seem repugnant to some, but so too does much of what the First Amendment protects. If the First Amendment protects flag burning, funeral protests, and Nazi parades —- despite the profound offense such spectacles cause —- it surely protects political campaign speech despite popular opposition.”
“This is especially true for elections,” he wrote. The Supreme Court in 1971 held that “the First Amendment has its fullest and most urgent application precisely to the conduct of campaigns for political office.”
Predictably, Democrat Nancy Pelosi whined, “I’m concerned about what it means for our democracy. Our founders, they sacrificed their lives, their liberty, their sacred honor for a democracy: a government of the many, not a government of the money. It’s totally ridiculous. But that is the path that this court is on.”
Once again, Pelosi is wrong. Campaign finance laws have been an incumbent protection racket. Their survival is threatened when newcomers have the ability to become more viable candidates. Pelosi joins the other leftists who are throwing tantrums over this
And while Republicans overwhelmingly applauded the victory for free speech, it was no surprise that John McCain came out against the decision. McCain, who co-sponsored the campaign finance law that restricted corporate donations to campaigns —- largely struck down by the Citizens United ruling —- released this written statement in which he emulated his Democrat cohorts:
“I was disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision today. While I have advocated for increasing the aggregate limits on individual contributions to candidates and party committees, I am concerned that today’s ruling may represent the latest step in an effort by a majority of the court to dismantle entirely the longstanding structure of campaign finance law erected to limit the undue influence of special interests on American politics. I predict that as a result of recent court decisions, there will be scandals involving corrupt public officials and unlimited, anonymous campaign contributions that will force the system to be reformed once again.”
There’s no way to improve on this comment on Best of Cain:
“Look on the bright side, Democrats. When you lose in November, you’ll have a brand new, ready-made, excuse. It’s not your disastrous, unpopular, policies and your atrocious President that are causing your failure. It’s evil Republican money. It won’t be true, but you can put it on a t-shirt and sell it to the sheep. It’ll be a new way to raise all that money you despise!”