[EL] Equating journalistic editorials with other corporate election advocacy

[Paul Lehto]

On Sat, Mar 24, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Smith, Brad <BSmith at law.capital.edu>wrote:

> That has, in fact, been the history of campaign finance restrictions. Each
> restriction forces political speech to migrate to the next most effective
> medium, or forces innovation that leads to even more effective means of
> communication. And each time this new form is denounced as a "loophole"
> that must be closed. When it is, the cycle simply repeats.
>
>
This is the foundation of a regularly observed "futility" argument when it
comes to campaign finance, as seen both on this list and elsewhere.  The
idea is that reform "never succeeds," which is what is implied above.

But this same general futility argument can be applied to other fields of
law like criminal law.  Criminals generally, and especially white collar
criminals like tax offenders, quite often "innovate" and thus move on to
exploit the next perceived "loophole" after a present loophole is more
firmly closed, repeating the cycle endlessly, just as is alleged above with
respect to campaign finance violations.

Of course, we will always have crime, and we will always have civil
violations of laws.  No legislation or reform ever makes a field "safe" for
eternity, or even for substantial periods of time.  *If this lack of a
"final solution" means that we must give up on the project of campaign
finance regulation/reform, then we must also give up all hope of amending
or modifying criminal laws, securities laws, tax laws, and many other laws
in addition to campaign finance laws, on the same grounds of futility based
on the motivation or craftiness of those who "wanna do what they wanna do."*

I realize Brad did not expressly make the assertion that reform is futile,
he just stopped one step short of doing so.  But others have.  And the fact
that CU grounds its ruling in the Constitution powerfully reinforces a
similar futility argument, albeit on the differing ground that many of
these laws are impermissibly unconstitutional, and therefore futile in
terms of having any lasting effect before being struck down.

Paul Lehto, J.D.

>  *Bradley A. Smith*
>
> *Josiah H. Blackmore II/Shirley M. Nault*
>
> *   Professor of Law*
>
> *Capital University Law School*
>
> *303 E. Broad St.*
>
> *Columbus, OH 43215*
>
> *614.236.6317*
>
> *http://law.capital.edu/faculty/bios/bsmith.aspx*
>   ------------------------------
>
> --
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://webshare.law.ucla.edu/Listservs/law-election/attachments/20120324/8050af15/attachment.html>