The Supremes do it again (CNN, dollars, biased, elections)

[florida.bob]

Their partisan activism continues. It's the old, "one dollar, one vote" concept.

High court strikes down taxpayer-supported campaign spending law – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

[workingclasshero]

the SCOTUS is correct

[shorebaby]

Too funny, fringe candidates aren't going to get tax payer money!! Oh the humanity!!

[Quick Enough]

Originally Posted by florida.bob

Their partisan activism continues. It's the old, "one dollar, one vote" concept.

High court strikes down taxpayer-supported campaign spending law – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

You wouldn't be posting a biased opinion would you?

I'll bet you praised the SC when the gave their verdict on Roe vs. Wade and you didn't call that "partisan activism".

[rogerbacon]

Originally Posted by florida.bob

Their partisan activism continues. It's the old, "one dollar, one vote" concept.

High court strikes down taxpayer-supported campaign spending law – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

This is an excellant ruling. Taxpayers should not have to support candidates whose ideas are not supported by the population at large (which is why they weren't able to raise enough money in the first place).

Even better, I like Florida.Bob's idea of one dollar, one vote. Everyone should be allowed one vote for each 5,000 dollars they pay in income taxes. Let those who support this country have a greater say in electing those who run the country.

[hotair2]

Originally Posted by rogerbacon

This is an excellant ruling. Taxpayers should not have to support candidates whose ideas are not supported by the population at large (which is why they weren't able to raise enough money in the first place).

Even better, I like Florida.Bob's idea of one dollar, one vote. Everyone should be allowed one vote for each 5,000 dollars they pay in income taxes. Let those who support this country have a greater say in electing those who run the country.

The problem is not with the population at large within that State, but funding from out of state sources. Candidates are getting money from both pro democrat and pro republican billionaires who wish to set a national agenda. I wish some brave lawmaker would introduce a bill to make a constitutional amendment to restrict thes out of state money adds and PACs. Forget about taxpayers having to compete with billionaires, just get rid of the out of state money interests.

[BentBow]

Originally Posted by florida.bob

Their partisan activism continues. It's the old, "one dollar, one vote" concept.

High court strikes down taxpayer-supported campaign spending law – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

So you think your tax dollars should go to someones campaign. What if it all when to the Conservative candidates?

Would you think the SC was wrong then?

[florida.bob]

Originally Posted by Quick Enough

You wouldn't be posting a biased opinion would you?

I'll bet you praised the SC when the gave their verdict on Roe vs. Wade and you didn't call that "partisan activism".

You mean the 7-2 decision, no I didn't, and I was pretty Conservative on most issues at that time. Plus, the Supremes were still using the Constitution and Precedence as guides for decisions then.

[Willsson]

It wouldn't be such a bad idea if ALL campaign contributions were paid into a STATE's campaign fund to be distributed to ALL candidates for ALL offices in State elections... EQUALLY.

Federal contributions to be divided among the states according to electoral votes.

City and County campaign funds handle in the same fashion, only locally.

[Calvinist]

Originally Posted by florida.bob

Their partisan activism continues. It's the old, "one dollar, one vote" concept.

High court strikes down taxpayer-supported campaign spending law – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

I gotta say...I'm honestly undecided on that one...but if you're against it, I am almost forced to conclude it was probably a good ruling.