[EM] Voting Systems Study of the League of Women Voters
6049awj02 at sneakemail.com
Mon Jun 6 21:12:01 PDT 2005
RLSuter-at-aol.com |EMlist| wrote:
> In a message dated 6/6/05, Russ Paielli wrote:
>>when I found out that they
>>blatantly oppose the First Amendment I dumped them ASAP.
>>What else can you call a prohibition on "issue-advocacy"
>>ads within 60 days before a general election? And what part
>>of "Congress shall pass no law ..." don't they understand?
> I thought this list was about election methods. Half-informed
> pronouncements like the above belong elsewhere. The idea
> that political ads can't be regulated even when broadcast
> on publicly owned airwaves is not a viewpoint that can be
> fairly derived from a reading of the first amendment.
Yes, it was a slightly off-topic tangent, but the best election method
in the world is worthless if free speech is squelched during the
campaign. When the government gets into the business of deciding who is
and is not allowed to run political ads before an election, it's on a
very slippery slope. Also, the bit about "publicly owned" airwaves is a
red herring. Unless I am mistaken, the LWV recommendations had no such
qualification and applied equally to cable TV, for example.
More information about the Election-Methods