CQ.com offers this
very interesting report about the imminent ruling in the McCain-Feingold
case. What happens if the lower court strikes down the ban on soft money,
and it does not issue a stay of its decision? According to the article, Jan
Baran, a lawyer for Mitch McConnell "said it is likely that everyone would
continue to abide by the new law until the high court rules. Even if the
Supreme Court does not take up the case until the fall, he predicted the
justices would settle the case by the end of the year." A spokesperson for
the Democrats "said her group will follow whatever rules are in place — and
do whatever it takes under those rules to stay competitive. 'If all the other
committees are raising soft money, then we will too,' she said."
This could well put Democrats into a difficult position. Republicans are
doing better than Democrats in fundraising for 2004 thus far, because, for
various reasons, they have an easier time raising those "hard money" contributions
of up to $2,000 from individuals. Republicans might decide not to be the
first to raise soft money in case the lower court strikes down the soft money
ban. Democrats could decide to follow suit (as the spokesperson suggests),
meaning they will remain at a disadvantage, or they could choose to raise
soft money first and look like hypocrites (although the law is the Birpartisan
Campaign Reform Act, it had much greater support amongDemocrats than Republicans).
--
Rick Hasen
Professor of Law and William M. Rains Fellow
Loyola Law School
919 South Albany Street
Los Angeles, CA 90015-1211
(213)736-1466 - voice
(213)380-3769 - fax
rick.hasen@lls.edu
http://www.lls.edu/academics/faculty/hasen.html
http://electionlaw.blogspot.com