The Phoenix

How Yesterday's Supreme Court Decision Loosening Ad Restrictions in The Campaign Finance Law Will Affect the Campaign

    Yesterday, by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court (in the words of the NY Times) ruled that "the restrictions on television advertisements paid for from corporate or union treasuries in the weeks before an election amounted to censorship of core political speech unless those advertisements explicitly urge a vote for or against a particular candidate." The result will be a plethora of ads before the November election in swing states by "issue groups" that will overshadow the ads by the candidates themselves.
    Who benefits from the decision? In theory, unions and liberal groups can run as many ads as conservative groups such as the NRA and business interests. But when money talks, the Republicans generally benefit -- and will here. Moreover the line the Court created is incredibly vague: What's the difference between an ad that implicitly, as opposed to "explicitly," urges a vote against a candidate?
    If you like negative ads, you'll love the fall of 2008.

Published Jun 26 2007, 01:31 PM by Importer

Name (required)

Your URL (optional)

Comments (required)

Remember Me?

ABOUT THIS BLOG