Posted on 03/20/2002 4:33:41 PM PST by erk
|
For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
March 20, 2002
Statement by the President
Like many Republicans and Democrats in the Congress, I support common-sense reforms to end abuses in our campaign finance system. The reforms passed today, while flawed in some areas, still improve the current system overall, and I will sign them into law.
The legislation makes some important progress on the timeliness of disclosure, individual contribution limits, and banning soft money from corporations and labor unions, but it does present some legitimate constitutional questions. I continue to believe the best reform is full and timely disclosure of campaign contributions.
###
Based on that statement I expect he will sign it. But just like the stem cell research issue, Bush found a way to approve the research and protect future unborn. Lets see if he can thread this needle. BB's postings led me to relealize that there are other ways to win this even if the bill is law. Bush is the one to enforce the laws and he can simply state that those parts that are not constitutional will not be enforced.
Don't forget that upon Ashcroft's first visit to Meet the Press post-confirmation he made quite clear that the overturning of Roe was not on this administration's agenda.
Maybe someday when we're not busy fighting Moral Wars we can clean house here at home where our Culture of Death and abrogation of the Constitution are concerned.
The War on Terrorism's going to end, right?
But still, he beats the heck out of Gore. I still dont think I could bring myself to vote libertarian... yet. If BU
You're too mad.
Bush has guaranteed his re-election with this signature, since hard money limits are doubled, and Bush raised more hard money than any candidate in history in 2000.
And, for those who think most Republicans are going to vote against Bush because of CFR, think again.
Amnesty, maybe. CFR, not a chance.
Besides, there's no such thing as CFR. Lawyers are sitting in rooms right now devising ways to get around this bill.
And, that's assuming that the Supreme Court doesn't torpedo major portions of it, which is a faulty assumption.
Besides, I thought everybody on FR was going to vote third party or Democrat because of the "amnesty" (which isn't an amnesty but it doesn't matter).
God HELP the United States
That hits the nail on the head!
I too thought that as of yesterday but that isn't true. He can choose to announce he won't enforce the parts he believes are not constitutional.
"Flawed in some areas", how about unconstitutional. I am disappointed in reading this statement by President Bush, even though I suspected that this would be the outcome.
I prefer that people I support WIN. The Constitutionality of this is yet to be determined.
Lots of people on this site supported the line item veto, which was also clearly unconstitutional, and was ruled as such, even though lots of Republicans voted for it.
No one promoted the line-item veto more than Ronald Reagan.
He seems to be effectively accomplishing a certain amount of "incrementalism". Of course conservatives, me included, would rather things change significantly and swiftly. One of the things I always thought about Clinton was that the legislation he was signing was not as devastating as the work being done by the everyday appointees he had put in place. I trust that this is being duly accomplished in the other direction, as I am familiar with a very high level appointee of one of the largest cabinet departments.
Having said all that, I don't like the legislation, think it is an attack on the 1st Amendment and still hope he doesn't sign it; but like you, I'll stick around to see how the second half of the game goes.
Maybe we should instead turn our web site backgrounds to red. Red would both denote our anger about Congress attempting to legislate away our Constitutional right to free (political) speech, but also to be a not so subtle reference to the communist tactics used to usurp our capitalist marketplace for political communications. It also brings to mind the blood shed by our troops to secure our right to free speech. And of course red has a psychological effect of inducing passion and tension.
And here is our poster boy to tell 'em what they can do with CFR.
A photo of the Capital building with a red tint might be and interesting ploy too.
Foru years ought to be enough for Billybob to get it thru SC.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.