Have a question or issue in campaign law? Contact us and we'll try to answer you. Enter your e-mail below:
Learn more about...
Interested in a specific subject? Click here to browse our blog by subject area.
Blog Roll
AFJ Nonprofit Advocacy Blog
Beltway Blogroll
Campaign Legal Center blog
Cato Unbound
Common Cause Blog
Division of Labour
First Amendment Center
Going to the Mat
Instapundit.com
The Lonely Centrist
Michael Barone
More Soft Money Hard Law (Bob Bauer)
Political Activity Law
Public Citizen WatchdogBlog
RedState
Rick Hasen's Election Law Blog
Sabato's Crystal Ball
The Volokh Conspiracy
Votelaw
|
|
Outrageous hyperbole during S. 1285 hearings
Published on June 20, 2007 11:40 AM
by Paul Sherman
File Under: "Clean" Elections, Taxpayer Financing
Sen. Arlen Specter, co-sponsor of the "Fair Elections Now Act" (S. 1285), described the decision in Buckley v. Valeo striking down expenditure limits as, "the worst decision of the Supreme Court of the United States since the Dred Scott decision."
Worse, apparently, than either Plessy v. Ferguson or Korematsu v. United States.
Just last year, six justices of the Supreme Court reaffirmed that holding of Buckley in Randall v. Sorrell, in which CCP filed an amicus brief (.pdf). No word from Sen. Specter on whether this is the new worst decision since Dred Scott, or merely a runner up.
Seriously, is there any limit to the hyperbole "reform" proponents are willing to engage in?
Archived video of the hearing is now available. To hear Sen. Specter's comment, skip ahead to 18:20.
