Quote:
Originally posted by Captain
The idea of giving or using money in a given way constituting free speech really is an interesting one. Free speech clearly includes more than just speaking. It includes singing, writing, and, I would contend, other visible or aural expressions. If, however, I can say, speak away, but don't buy television time to do it, am I not limiting free speech? If I can limit what someone does with their money am I not telling them they can speak all they want - but just to their immediate neighbors? What do people think?
|
Limiting a candidate's expenditures raises a different set of issues than limiting donations of others to a candidate so that he may buy better speech opportunities.
BTW, let me qualify something I said with respect to corporations. While they should not themselves have First A rights, I acknowledge that some people may benefit from hearing what they have to say. But I'm not troubled by Club's worry about inveighing against taxes and such, because most corporations have individuals who can speak on their behalf. Doesn't mean they should get to pay off the legislators to get their way.
