I sure hope this is some sort of early April Fool’s joke.
Assembly Speaker Mike Huebsch (R-West Salem) said there could be room for campaign finance reform that requires third parties to register and report their activities within so many days of an election. But such a law would have crafted carefully so it didn’t infringe on rights to free speech, he said.
“I’m going to be very cautious about limiting any individual’s ability to speak ill of their government,” Huebsch said. He added that the best form of campaign finance reform is full disclosure.
Instead of being cautious, why don’t we just not do it? Think…. 1st Amendment.
Actually, it’s Article I, Section 3 of the state Constitution. The 1st Amendment of the federal Constitution deals exclusively with Congress.
Stepping beyond that minor quibble, I’ll echo you - “Just say ‘No’ to CFR.”
Good point. My bad.
Blame decades (actually, over a century if memory serves) of piss-poor education at all levels, from elementary to law school. The First and Tenth Amendments are the only ones that were specifically written to limit only the federal government’s power, and they have routinely been misapplied to the states and local governments.
One of the areas where I find common ground with my rightwing brothers and sisters is in the area of campaign finance. Having said that, where we have independants spending more than candidates, requiring the disclosure of funding sources (no limits, etc.) does not violate either the state or federal constitutions.
Requiring the disclosure of candidate contributions is meaningless if the real campaign is fought by independants.
Bob, I’ve always been in favor of full disclosure, from ALL groups as well as campaigns, of ALL contributors.
Some people don’t like that idea, but I think it’s worth debate.