Goodbye McCain/Feingold

[Monkeyleg]

Everyone seems to be enjoying beating up on Republicans and President Bush these days, so I thought it appropriate to celebrate the death of the McCain/Feingold Incumbent Protection law.

Yes, I know that Bush punted when signing the bill, thinking the Supreme Court would strike it down. Without his appointments of Roberts and Alito, though, the law would still be standing today.

Meanwhile, Obama's "wise Latina" voted to keep the law intact. I'm sure we can rely on her wisdom when the court addresses incorporation of the 2nd.

Again, no difference between Republicans and Democrats.

[Standing Wolf]

Yes, I know that Bush punted when signing the bill, thinking the Supreme Court would strike it down. Without his appointments of Roberts and Alito, though, the law would still be standing today.

No nitwit quite like a lucky nitwit.

Seriously: it was a wonderful ruling.

[gunsmith]

No nitwit quite like a lucky nitwit.

Seriously: it was a wonderful ruling.

I was stoked to see that this morning, lets hop B.O doesn't get to select anyone else b4 incorporation

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

They're calling it Judicial Activism.  

[longeyes]

What's alarming is that like Heller it was 5-4.

[Ned Hamford]

"The majority opinion by Justice Kennedy is 57 pages, and Justice Stevens’ partial dissent is 90 pages long."

Anyone care to volunteer their time or can I safely continue think it all hogwash and handwaggling over fairly simplistic issues and views?

IE: Majority- jailing of citizens and associations for 1st amendment rights and a huge bar on newcomers due to complex rules and... questionable enforcement.

Minority: EBIL Corporations!  Look not beyond our speaking points and the common practice of banding [bonuses with expected contributions from receivers to work around direct contributions] as we pretend its a wholly effective law that accomplishes its stated purposes.

[Regolith]

"The majority opinion by Justice Kennedy is 57 pages, and Justice Stevens’ partial dissent is 90 pages long."

Anyone care to volunteer their time or can I safely continue think it all hogwash and handwaggling over fairly simplistic issues and views?

IE: Majority- jailing of citizens and associations for 1st amendment rights and a huge bar on newcomers due to complex rules and... questionable enforcement.

Minority: EBIL Corporations!  Look not beyond our speaking points and the common practice of banding [bonuses with expected contributions from receivers to work around direct contributions] as we pretend its a wholly effective law that accomplishes its stated purposes.

Haven't read the opinions myself, but from the other summaries I've read (mostly by Volokh, et al), that's pretty much it. 

[Desertdog]

I hope that a number of religious organizations can also overturn the LBJ bill that makes them not be able to mention a candidate by name without losing their tax exempt status.

[Silver Bullet]

Again, no difference between Republicans and Democrats

How did the Supreme Court vote go among Republican appointees and Democrat appointees ?

[Monkeyleg]

Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy were the justices who said the law was unconstitutional. All Republican appointees.

[Silver Bullet]

Okay ... so ... you still don't see any difference between Republicans and Democrats ?

[Monkeyleg]

Silver Bullet, I was being sarcastic about the difference. The sarcasm was directed toward participants in a different thread, which is probably why you didn't detect it.

[Northwoods]

Scalia, Roberts, Thomas, Alito and Kennedy were the justices who said the law was unconstitutional. All Republican appointees.

Dissenters:
Stevens (Rep - Ford)
Ginsberg (Dem - Clinton)
Souter (Rep - Bush 41)
Sotomayor (Marxist - Obama)

[Balog]

I find it ironic that you view the striking down of a law passed by R's as... proof that the R's are great. I lol'ed.

That being said, I love this ruling.

[Sergeant Bob]

I find it ironic that you view the striking down of a law passed by R's as... proof that the R's are great. I lol'ed.

That being said, I love this ruling.

I was hoping someone would see the irony. 

[Monkeyleg]

Touche'.

[Perd Hapley]

I find it ironic that you view the striking down of a law passed by R's as... proof that the R's are great. I lol'ed.

Huh?  What kind of childish crap is that, and why do people have to do that all the time?  Can you point out where anyone said the R's are "great"?  Can you not understand the vast gulf between "R's and D's are not the same" (what Monkeyleg essentially said), and "R's are great"? 

[Silver Bullet]

Silver Bullet, I was being sarcastic about the difference. The sarcasm was directed toward participants in a different thread, which is probably why you didn't detect it.

Gotcha.  I guess I'm not well read.   

[Headless Thompson Gunner]

I find it ironic that you view the striking down of a law passed by R's as... proof that the R's are great. I lol'ed.

That being said, I love this ruling.

McCain/Feingold is technically known as the "Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act".  Unlike most stupidly named bills, this name is actually pretty accurate.  The bill was bipartisan, it was passed by both Democrats and Republicans alike.

Actually, my memory may be foggy on this, but I believe McCain/Feingold was supported by far more democrats than Republicans.

EDIT:  I looked up the numbers.  Turns out my foggy memory was correct and I was mistaken about this being a bipartisan bill.  This was a Democrat bill.

In the House, Republicans voted 175 to 41 against the bill, Democrats voted 198 to 12 for it.  In the Senate, Republicans voted 38 to 11 against it, Democrats voted 48 to 2 for it.

Sources:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2002-34
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2002-54

(Tell me again how there's no difference between Rs and Ds...)

[Sergeant Bob]

McCain/Feingold is technically known as the "Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act".  Unlike most stupidly named bills, this name is actually pretty accurate.  The bill was bipartisan, it was passed by both Democrats and Republicans alike.

Actually, my memory may be foggy on this, but I believe McCain/Feingold was supported by far more democrats than Republicans.

EDIT:  I looked up the numbers.  Turns out my foggy memory was correct and I was mistaken about this being a bipartisan bill.  This was a Democrat bill.

In the House, Republicans voted 175 to 41 against the bill, Democrats voted 198 to 12 for it.  In the Senate, Republicans voted 38 to 11 against it, Democrats voted 48 to 2 for it.

Sources:
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=h2002-34
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/vote.xpd?vote=s2002-54

(Tell me again how there's no difference between Rs and Ds...)

So, you're saying it wasn't a Republican who cosponsored the the anti free speech, incumbent protection act?

[PTK]

I'm doing a little dance right now.

One down, about two million bad laws to go...

[Perd Hapley]

So, you're saying it wasn't a Republican who cosponsored the the anti free speech, incumbent protection act?

The Senate version was sponsored by one R and one D, with a lot of other R's and D's co-sponsoring as well.  The House version, which actually passed, was originally sponsored by an R named Christopher Shays.  
 
How does this detract from what HTG just said?  

More childishness...  

[Sergeant Bob]

The Senate version was sponsored by one R and one D, with a lot of other R's and D's co-sponsoring as well.  The House version, which actually passed, was originally sponsored by an R named Christopher Shays.  
 
How does this detract from what HTG just said?  

More childishness...  

Oh, grow up!

[longeyes]

R's & D's?  McCain and Bush are both, yes, liberals in everything that really matters.

[Waitone]

Both sides of the aisle bear responsibility for the legislation.  But it remains the legacy of one president who signed the legislation in spite of his opposition and questions of constitutionality . . . . George 43th.