3 ms·

So, what makes newspaper exempt from this? They can publish opinion pieces on who to support, and they are spending a lot of money in producing newspaper. Surel

So, what makes newspaper exempt from this? They can publish opinion pieces on who to support, and they are spending a lot of money in producing newspaper. Surely that _should_ violate McCain-Feingold? Except it didn't, because there was a special exemption for media. What makes that fair? Let's say I'm an individual, and I support Santa Claus for president. But I'm also a famous personality, and I spend a million dollars to put on a free speaking tour where I support Santa Claus for president. Aren't I using money to support my speech? I'm not just using my mouth, I'm using my money to pursue my first amendment rights.

thephyber 9y ago
It's never been illegal in the US to support an issue to the fullest extent of your financial capabilities. You can make statements into a public forum with your every last dollar. It had been, for decades, illegal for one person to support one specific candidate/campaign. It was never quite enforced such that it made a huge difference (shell companies, PACs, etc make it easy to skirt rules and funnel campaign support) and candidates get progressively better at asking for "support" without actually making the tit-for-tat which moves it from the "lobbying" arena to "bribery". Also, IIRC that ruling established the precedent needed for SuperPACs and moved the individual contribution threshold.