Could this work?

[MichaelHarris]

I haven't had much of a chance to look into the campaign finance reform bill but I had a thought. If the RNC is able to stop the ad's from moveon.org couldn't the donators to moveon file a class action lawsuit with violating their 1st Ad rights? Think of it this way, we donated money so moveon could be our voice and the RNC has denied us that right. A good lawyer like maybe one of OJ's lawyers might be able to win, after all the glove didn't fit did it?

[Sulldogg]

1. A couple of issues

The RNC can't consitutionally deny that or any right, as a legal matter.

Second, according to the SCOTUS, the McCain-Feingold bill is entirely constitutional, so merely making acase that group A fits a definition in that law hardly seems like breaking a law.

Third, MoveOn and the like can, and should, alter their advertisements to comply with the law. It isn't that hard, and in theory could help more local candidates.

[MichaelHarris]

3. So

what your saying is there is no way the RNC can be held accountable for any violation of a groups constitutional rights? moveon's money comes from people like you and I. It doesn't go to a particular candidate or party. If the RNC is able to bully the networks into stopping the ad's you see no violation in MoveOn's freedom of speech? If you had 3 million dollars to blow and wanted to make a commercial during an election year about, lets say healthcare. Then using your argument the RNC has the right to stop you if they feel the ad undermines their campaign? If the RNC's campaign to stop these ad's work then couldn't an argument against the biased reporting the So-Called Fox news channel shows be held to the same standards? When the guy Hannity says at the top of the show, "245 days until we re-elect george bush" thats ok? If there is a true investigation into campaign advertising I say we start with fox and look into the deals made for their time and the fairness in journalism.

[Sulldogg]

4. Not sure

No, if the RNC convinces the FEC (3-3 split) that the 527's are acting like bodies specifically regulated in McCain-Feingold, and the 527's can't put forth a convincing defense, the RNC isn't denying anyone their rights.

And if you wanted to do a healthcare add, you more than likley don't fall under McCain-Feingold and could make that add. No one has to accept it nor air it, but any group has the right to bring a legal challenge if they feel your ad violates existing law.

If we want large amounts of private money out of politics (as I do) we won't do it by flooding private money into it. McCain-Feingold was a terrible idea and a tragedy when it was upheld. The 527's only make us look like huge hypocrits for being for campaign finance reform, but not if it hurts our candidates.

[tobius]

2. one of the problems with mccain/feingold was not enough

people "looked into it". as i have posted in related threads, the freedom of speech issue was brought up for years as it relates to advocacy advertising. most people just went along with their congressperson or party when they supported this bill.
most politicians who supported it were just positioning themselves to be for " campaign finance reform" no matter what was in the bill. it wasn't republicans who are shutting down moveon, it was the creation of these 527's specifically to try to make an end run around soft money restrictions that is the hight of hypocracy. this 527 scheme was planned out at the same time the votes were being tallied for mccain/feingold in the hope that rulings for or against would be held over until after this election cycle.