4 ms·
Because the buyers are all registered political entities: candidates' campaigns, political action committees, etc. It's illegal for a "regular person" to go buy
by hudibras 8y ago
Because the buyers are all registered political entities: candidates' campaigns, political action committees, etc. It's illegal for a "regular person" to go buy political ads and not register with the state.
- CamperBob2 8y agoThat sounds like an outrageous First Amendment violation.
- hudibras 8y agoNo one is stopping that person from buying anything; they just have to register first.
- chrismcb 8y agoSo if you don't register, your free speech is abridged. The first amendment doesn't say you have to register before you are given free speech.
- hudibras 8y agoI don't know what to tell you, other than that the Public Disclosure Commission and the Fair Campaign Practices Act have been Washington state law since the early 1970s.
- CamperBob2 8y agoI don't know what to tell you either, but the authors of the First Amendment had some pretty strong ideas on the subject about 200 years before that. They didn't seem quite as ambivalent on the subject as most people here. I wonder why?
- hudibras 8y agoIs a law prohibiting me from secretly giving an elected official a briefcase full of one million dollars constitutional? If so, why is it not the same if there's a law that says I can't secretly provide $1,000,000 in services to the same elected official in the form of political advertising? The authors of the U.S. Constitution had some pretty strong ideas on the idea of bribery; in fact, it's explicitly listed in Article 2, Section 4 as an impeachable offense. The public has a right to know when its politicians and government officials are receiving money (or goods and services) from outside entities.
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y agoYou also can't hand out legal or medical advice without being registered. Is that a violation of free speech?
- 0xffff2 8y agoYou can't? There's literally a subreddit called "legaladvice". Someone should tell them. You can't claim to be an attorney or a doctor if you're not one, but as far as I know that's the limit of any restrictions.
- madeofpalk 8y agoDoes it? - it’s barely outrageous - doesn’t seem to be about the first amendment - nor is it much of a violation
- CamperBob2 8y agoSomething about "making no law abridging the freedom of the press." What other forms of speech would you, personally, like to see require government registration?
- seandougall 8y agoHow about: any claim to be a medical professional, law enforcement officer, or attorney? (I’m sure there’s more, but those come immediately to mind.)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- CamperBob2 8y agoThat would fall under the category of fraud, which is not considered protected speech. Political speech, on the other hand, is exactly what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. You cannot have a participatory democratic republic without it, any more than you can defend one without arms. Disagree? Great, there's a process in place for amending the Constitution. We should either follow the process or follow the document. Those are the only legitimate options.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- mattmcknight 8y agoGood point. See the Federalist Papers, by Publius. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pseudonyms_used_in_the_American_Constitutional_debates https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pseudonyms_used_in_the...