Mike Thompson: “Well, I think that is a direction that we are trying to head in. I am not for trying to sit down and detail what…”

“Well, I think that is a direction that we are trying to head in. I am not for trying to sit down and detail what somebody can say or not say. That is clearly unconstitutional. You can't do that. The Buckley case made a distinction between contributions and expenditures. Basically, it said you can't regulate expenditures. Independent groups ought to be able to do whatever they want to do whenever they want to do it. But we decided a long time ago that, as far as campaign finance was concerned, we were electing the judges of our society in a way--you know, when we go to elect judges in our system, they are supposed to be independent. The litigants on either side can do things and get paid large sums of money, and so forth, but what you can do with regard to a judge is highly, highly narrow, in our system, and is regulated. In a sense, we are the same way. I mean, we get elected by people-- one vote, one person; it is an equal deal. No matter how poor or rich you are, or your status in society, your vote counts as much as anybody else's. We are elected. I represent all of the people of the State of Tennessee, no matter how many votes I get. The President represents all of the people of the country. We come up here and we are supposed to represent everybody. We are supposed to pass legislation evenhanded. We have different views on different things. We have support here and opposition there.”