No, I do not believe under any circumstances that it is. There is an absolute prohibition against so much as mentioning the name of a candidate in a 60-day period before an election in this bill. I simply refer the Senator to the first amendment. If that is not a law abridging the freedom of speech, we could not pass a law abridging the freedom of speech. Any other limitation or restriction would be valid. It flies directly into the teeth of the plain meaning of the first amendment.
T. Gorton: “No, I do not believe under any circumstances that it is. There is an absolute prohibition against so much as mentioning…”
Editor's note · Context
Discussing the implications of a bill on free speech rights before elections.
Share
More from T. Gorton
I would agree that maintaining dual suppliers of high performance, environmentally acceptable fire retardants is critical to the mission of the Service.
I agree with that view. It should be the U.S. Forest Service's priority to use the most effective, environmentally protective aerially applied fire retardants.
In response to my colleague, the senior Senator from Nevada, let me say that your understanding of the issues affecting Lake Tahoe is correct. Your concerns seem reasonable, as does your interpretation of the language in question.
I expect that the $2.5 million grant program administered by NFWF will leverage at least $2.5 million overall in additional, nonfederal funds.





