Eminent Domain

Law professor and blog guru Glenn Reynolds linked to this article (he's quoted in it too) about blogger anger about campaign finance restrictions under McCain-Feingold. I've made my feelings about McCain-Feingold known, so it's good to see that I am not alone in my disgust with the law.

I guess I think it's a little odd that the article focuses on what bloggers think (especially since the new provision bans mentioning a candidate's name in broadcast advocacy ads, not blogs... though that may not be far away), but I guess it shows that some bloggers have become influential.

Here's Glenn Reynolds on the matter...

"It's wrong, it's unAmerican, and it's the single best argument against either McCain or Feingold running for President in 2008[.]"

Amen to that. Their ideas about the First Amendment are so out of whack that neither one should be considered for the presidency.

Bill Hobbs has some advice...

In addition to forming a '527,' named for the section of the IRS tax code under which they are organized, here's another suggestion for groups wishing to continue running commercials criticizing candidates by name: Make the ads, then upload them to YouTube, and spread them via blogs."

As long as there are laws, there will be ways to get around them.

Why do these campaign finance laws get bipartisan support? Preston Taylor Holmes has an answer...

"Why was this bill supported by both parties? Because they're cut from the same clothe. It's like the NBA All-Star game - they wear different uniforms, but they're really on the same team - the team of the incumbency."

Reduce the amount of criticism that is broadcast, increase your chances of being re-elected. Now that's something that all incumbent politicians can get behind, First Amendment be damned.