Censorship on Campaign Reforms is Abhorrent to The 1st Amendment

Dear Editor,

I have a comment on: Union Spends Big Bucks to Demonize Christie’s Education Reform Proposal

Campaign reforms are about censorship. The only thing political campaigns produce is communications for mass distribution.

The Unions want to keep corporate money out because it would limit the ability of conservatives to buy TV ads.

Likewise the Republicans want to limit the amount of money unions can spend on elections.

Both attempts at censorship are abhorrent to the 1st Amendment. Both unions and corporations are assemblies of people and as such are free to coordinate their money, time and talent to communicate their political views through speech and press.

Here is what the First Amendment to the US Constitution says:

Amendment 1

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people to peaceably assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

And here is the summary judgement from the district court on the court case against the Associated Press that sought to exclude nonmembers.

UNITED STATES v. ASSOCIATED PRESS – Decided June 18, 1945

It would be strange indeed however if the grave concern for freedom of the press which prompted adoption of the First Amendment should be read as a command that the government was without power to protect that freedom.

That Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public, that a free press is a condition of a free society. Surely a command that the government itself shall not impede the free flow of ideas does not afford nongovernmental combinations a refuge if they impose restraints upon that constitutionally guaranteed freedom. Freedom to publish means freedom for all, and not for some. Freedom to publish is guaranteed by the Constitution, but freedom to combine to keep others from publishing is not. Freedom of the press from governmental interference under the First Amendment does not sanction repression of that freedom by private interests.

Hot this week

Did David Wineland and Serge Haroche Steal Idea For The Nobel Physics Prize?

Dr. Omerbashich says the Royal Swedish Academy is a Crime Scene and he has the proof that Nobel laureates stole his discovery.

New Approaches to Disaster Relief Challenges

Disaster relief has always been a challenge. NASA, Google,...

3 Legitimate Money Making Methods to Supplement Your Income

In a perfect world, when your landlord raises your...

2016 Predictions by World Renowned Medium and Psychic Lindy Baker

World renowned medium and psychic Lindy Baker is interviewed by The Hollywood Sentinel, discussing psychic power, the spirit world, life after death, areas of concern in 2016, and much more.

Digital Coupon Customers Spending More Than Double At Stores

A new study shows that customers who use digital coupons go shopping more for groceries and other household goods more often and spend more on their shopping trips.

Wind Farm Decommissioning Liability: Bird-Safety Research Raises Bigger Rural Question

Australia is studying how to reduce wind-farm bird deaths, but rural landholders still face unanswered questions over turbine foundations and cleanup costs.

California’s Long Vote Count Reshapes Major Races as Hilton Presses Election Changes

California’s long vote count has reshaped major races, pushed Raman into the LA runoff, and fueled Steve Hilton’s call for election changes.

Your Decade-by-Decade Guide to Plastic Surgery: 30s, 40s & 50s

It’s your 30th birthday, and when you look in...

A New Path Forward: Restructuring New York City’s Medical Model

For more than a decade, the American healthcare debate...

How Jensen Meeker Translates Jazz Fusion to the Underground Club Scene

In a city where every corner pulses with sound,...

Related Articles

Popular Categories