"Campaign Spending Limits are Dead"
Money corrupts! Well, unless the left is spending it. Then it is blessed and good and spent to fend off the evil of monied interests in politics:
The great campaign spending limitation experiment is dead, and it died without a whimper from those who have spent lifetimes decrying monies influence on politics — all because their favored candidate wielded the knife.
In Wisconsin, Republicans are re-learning this lesson as incumbent Supreme Court Justice David Prosser is facing a public employee union-fueled challenge from the left in an attempt to take control of the state’s Supreme Court. Wisconsin, the original good government state, has rigid campaign finance spending rules.
In the aftermath of the passage of collective bargaining laws, Justice Prosser is facing a $3 million public employee union spending onslaught through the Greater Wisconsin Committee featuring a commercial that falsely accuses him of shielding a child molesting priest as a prosecutor. Even the left-leaning Politifact has given the ad a low rating on its Truth O Meter.
Once again, because Justice Prosser is trapped conforming to campaign spending limitations, these false ads are going largely unchallenged as he struggles to tell his story.
At one time, campaign reformers could argue that campaign spending limits benefit the electorate with a straight-face. Today, in the wake of Obama’s 2008 and promised 2012 campaigns, and the Wisconsin Justice race that will determine the future of the state’s collective bargaining laws, no one can pretend any longer that campaign spending limitations do anything except put those that accept them at a strong disadvantage.
It is time, to level the playing field and get rid of political spending limits, taxpayer-funded matching funds and stop the charade. Although it is not hard to predict that when the right decides to play by the same financing rules that Obama and his cronies are using, the nation will be subjected to a chorus of condemnation in the New York Times from the formerly silent left.
Let’s hope that Republican candidates for president are smart enough to reject matching funds and the limitations on spending that accompany them. We cannot afford to unilaterally disarm in this upcoming election by accepting campaign funding limits, when President Obama will be spending 3 to 4 times that amount.
The political left is designed to find the weaknesses in the system and exploit those weaknesses — and what they’ve found is that, in the calculus of campaign financing, their spending and messaging (with invaluable aid from a supposedly neutral media that we all know is anything but) brings greater dividends than does the GOP’s concomitant calculated sanctimony in holding fast to rules they watch the liberal Democrats flout. Which is to say, the GOP’s attempts to make hay out of the flouting of the rules by Dems has been far less successful than has been the rule flouting — and subsequent control of the narrative it leads to — the Dem’s money buys.
The left is interested in the rule of law only insofar as it can be used to constrain the right. Which means the right has to be aware of the attacks and work to change the rule of law to shore the breaches through which “progressives” launch their attacks on our representative republic.
If buying judges they’ve already vetted by issue means the political left can control the outcome of lawmaking, they’ll do so without hesitation. Because doing so allows them to return the optics to that of operating within a representative republic, because the game is rigged, and the outcomes (through a series of orchestrated checks) predetermined.
It’s who they are. It’s what they do.