Shays-Meehan does not prohibit speech of any type. It seeks to stop the use of soft money to pay for campaign ads. This is a long-standing authority that Congress has been able to exercise, starting with prohibitions on corporation monies in 1907, unions in 1947, and then 1974 for Buckley v. Valeo. Soft money is not protected by the Constitution. Soft money was created by the FEC in 1978. It is a creature of the Federal bureaucracy. It has no particular standing under the Constitution. The Supreme Court has never held soft money to be constitutionally inviolate, and to argue that the Congress cannot undo what a Federal agent has wrought is to deliberately ignore who is the master and who is the servant. There is no free-speech violation in Shays-Meehan and no reason to support this amendment.
Lynn N. Rivers: “Shays-Meehan does not prohibit speech of any type. It seeks to stop the use of soft money to pay for campaign ads. This…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of the Shays-Meehan campaign finance reform legislation.
Share
More from Lynn N. Rivers
I think when my colleague looks at the real data, that what he will find, and I know and I am familiar with the study, and if the gentleman had been at the Committee on Science, he would have seen a lot of the problems with that study when…
over the weekend, when I was driving to my district, I came up behind a car that had a bumper sticker that read ``Invest in America; buy a congressman.'' Interestingly enough, my chief of staff saw the same bumper sticker here in…
my vote today on H. Res. 392 is not a vote in favor of the Israelis or the Palestinians. Nor is it a vote against them. It is a vote for peace. I am convinced that an enduring settlement on the long-standing differences between Israel and…
Clement Atlee once said, ``Democracy means government by discussion, but it is only effective if you can stop people from talking.'' I agree. Mr. Speaker, it is time to stop talking about special education funding. It is time to do…





