<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0"
 xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule"
>

<channel>
<title>Keyword: campaignfinance</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/campaignfinance/</link>
<description></description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 08:54:13 GMT</lastBuildDate>
<generator>Focus Forum</generator>
<ttl>15</ttl>

<item>
<title>Senators Want to Send FEC Back to the Drawing Board on Corporate Jets (Keating Five alert)</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2416139/posts</link>
<description>Feingold, McCain, Lieberman Introduce Resolution to Reverse FEC&#x26;#x92;s Action to Gut Corporate Jets Provision. WASHINGTON, DC &#x26;#x96; A bipartisan group of senators has introduced legislation to reject a Federal Election Commission regulation that would effectively gut Congress&#x26;#x92; work to crack down on Senators accepting rides on corporate jets. Senators Russ Feingold (D-WI), John McCain (R-AZ) and Joe Lieberman (ID-CT) introduced a resolution of disapproval under the Congressional Review Act to overturn the FEC&#x26;#x92;s decision and require it to redraft the regulation. In the regulation published in the Federal Register on December 7, the FEC undermined Congress&#x26;#x92; decision in 2007 to...</description>
<author>U.S. Sen. John McCain, RINO-Ariz.</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2416139/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 28 Dec 2009 08:54:13 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>AZ-Sen. 2010: Hayworth compares Grant Woods to bacterial algae (Hayworth attacks McCainiacs)</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2409605/posts</link>
<description>J.D. Hayworth yesterday took to the airwaves to pummel Grant Woods for filing a complaint with the FEC against the talk show host and potential Senate candidate. Woods alleged Hayworth is pulling in $540,000 a week in corporate in-kind contributions from KFYI/Clear Channel for using his show as a campaign platform. The response came in true talk show form as Hayworth called Woods an &#x26;#x93;ambulance chaser&#x26;#x94; who cashed in on a tobacco settlement lawsuit that was sold as a public health measure. &#x26;#x93;You&#x26;#x92;re even lower than some bacterial forms of algae, and that&#x26;#x92;s saying something,&#x26;#x94; Hayworth said, before chiding Woods...</description>
<author>The Arizona Capitol Times</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2409605/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 17 Dec 2009 16:04:39 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>AZ-Sen. 2010: Grant Woods complains to FEC about Hayworth (McCain attacks, tries to gag Hayworth)</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2408632/posts</link>
<description>Link only, per FR copyright rules</description>
<author>The Arizona Republic, Phoenix, Ariz.</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2408632/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2009 13:29:59 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Local firm under scrutiny for contributions to Reid</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2384636/posts</link>
<description>A local architecture firm that recently won an $8.3 million federal contract to redesign a U.S. border crossing in California is being investigated by the Federal Election Commission for irregular campaign contributions to Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada, who is up for re-election next year. Henderson resident Randy Spitzmesser prompted the FEC probe of his former employer, Tate Snyder Kimsey Architects. On behalf of the architecture firm, Las Vegas attorney Stan Hunterton told the Las Vegas Review-Journal by fax last month, &#x26;#x22;We do not believe that anything was intentionally done wrong&#x26;#x22; regarding campaign finances. Spitzmesser also thinks Henderson-based Tate Snyder...</description>
<author>LAS VEGAS REVIEW-JOURNAL</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2384636/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 12 Nov 2009 13:54:58 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Judge hears arguments on campaign restrictions
</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2382386/posts</link>
<description>New Orleans (AP) -- It&#x26;#x27;s now up to a federal judge in New Orleans to decide whether to put a challenge to campaign finance restrictions on a faster track to the U.S. Supreme Court. U.S. District Judge Ginger Berrigan heard arguments Monday by attorneys for Republican officials challenging the restrictions and from Federal Election Commission attorneys defending them. Republicans want Berrigan to send key issues in the case directly to the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals without a district court-level trial. . . . The New Orleans suit challenges limits on what state and national parties can spend in...</description>
<author>AP via SFGate</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2382386/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 9 Nov 2009 20:49:51 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Defending Chief Justice Roberts</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2380806/posts</link>
<description>In recent months, at least three major newspapers have carried columns attempting to push Chief Justice John Roberts into voting to uphold a grossly unconstitutional federal law. But their cheap distortions and Chicken Little yammering will fail. The chief justice will do his job, and the country will be better off for it. On Sept. 9, the U.S. Supreme Court reheard arguments in the landmark campaign finance and free speech case, Citizens United v. FEC. At issue in this case is whether the McCain-Feingold Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act (BCRA) could ban documentaries about candidates when Election Day is approaching. This...</description>
<author>Townhall.com</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2380806/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 7 Nov 2009 13:32:21 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Attorney (John) O&#x26;#x27;Quinn killed in car wreck</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2373841/posts</link>
<description>&#x26;#x3C;p&#x26;#x3E;Prominent Houston attorney John O&#x26;#x27;Quinn was one of two men who died this morning when their SUV slammed into a large tree on Allen Parkway after the driver apparently lost control, police said.&#x26;#x3C;/p&#x26;#x3E;

&#x26;#x3C;p&#x26;#x3E;&#x26;#x22;I&#x26;#x27;m stunned. The community lost one of its biggest assets,&#x26;#x22; said Rick Laminack, who worked with O&#x26;#x27;Quinn from 1987 until 2006. &#x26;#x22;He was a great lawyer who shared a lot of his wealth with people who needed help.&#x26;#x22;&#x26;#x3C;/p&#x26;#x3E;

</description>
<author>Houston Chronicle</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2373841/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 17:20:10 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Is Dissent &#x26;#x91;Legitimate&#x26;#x92;? Not According to Campaign Finance Laws - Watch out Fox News</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373733/posts</link>
<description>&#x26;#x22;But we shouldn&#x26;#x92;t be so entertained by this spectacle that we lose sight of why, at bottom, it is a disturbing one. It&#x26;#x92;s not just because, as many commentators have already observed, the president appears to be taking a page out of Nixon&#x26;#x92;s playbook. Fundamentally, it&#x26;#x92;s because the administration&#x26;#x92;s media war against Fox is but a minor display of the tremendous power the government has to stifle speech it views as illegitimate. Much of this power is the result of long-standing &#x26;#x93;campaign finance&#x26;#x94; laws. These laws impose all sorts of restrictions on political speech, and it&#x26;#x92;s no coincidence that the...</description>
<author>Pajamasmedia</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2373733/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 29 Oct 2009 15:23:09 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Congress Has 43,457,362 Reasons to Help Goldman Sachs
</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2372118/posts</link>
<description>Congress Has 43,457,362 Reasons to Help Goldman Sachs Embattled Firm and Its Employees Spread Millions Around Washington in Donations and Lobbying Expenses 95 Not all their money has gone for mansions and Ferraris. Employees of Goldman Sachs are listed as a top contributor to 55 separate members of Congress. (ABC News Photo Illustration) The embattled Goldman Sachs investment banking firm and its employees have spent more than $43 million dollars on lobbying and campaign contributions to cultivate friends and buy influence in Washington, D.C. since 1989, according to an ABC News analysis of campaign finance records compiled by the Center...</description>
<author>ABC News</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2372118/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:37:53 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Hearing on Easley and Democratic Party under way</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371167/posts</link>
<description>Hearing on Easley and Democratic Party under way Raleigh | A hearing to investigate the campaign of former Gov. Mike Easley and the state Democratic Party is under way. The State Board of Elections immediately went into closed session Monday to discuss how it will investigate whether Easley&#x26;#x92;s campaign committee or the state Democratic Party broke campaign finance laws.</description>
<author>starnewsonline.com/AP</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2371167/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:30:01 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Acorn Woes Hit Union, Democrats</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2355896/posts</link>
<description>Democratic lawmakers in a handful of states are facing pressure from Republicans to distance themselves from the Service Employees International Union as a result of its ties to Acorn. Republicans in Kansas, Virginia and Illinois in recent weeks have called on union-backed Democrats to return SEIU campaign contributions, citing the close connection between the union and the community organizing group, whose full name is the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now.</description>
<author>The Wall Street Journal</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2355896/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 6 Oct 2009 14:32:08 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu sentenced to 24 years</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2351019/posts</link>
<description>Just heard on FoxNews. Former Democratic fundraiser Norman Hsu (shoo) is headed for a lengthy prison sentence after his conviction for violating campaign finance laws. Story still developing.</description>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2351019/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 20:16:02 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Reuters Leaves Out That Accused Swindler Was Big Democrat Fundraiser, Lobbyist</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2350872/posts</link>
<description>Reuters newswire service recently published a story reporting that accused swindler Allen Stanford has been moved to a federal lockup facility in downtown Houston in order &#x26;#x22;to be closer to his attorneys.&#x26;#x22; In fact in a fairly long story as wire copy goes, Reuters reports all sorts of details of Stanford&#x26;#x27;s alleged financial crimes and current status. There is only one little detail that Reuters seems to have forgotten to report. Allen Stanford was a major fundraiser and lobbyists for some of the biggest Democrats in the country. There isn&#x26;#x27;t a single mention, for instance, that Stanford lobbied Congress for...</description>
<author>Publius Forum</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2350872/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:05:49 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x26;#x22;The Rich&#x26;#x22; Are Giving The Finger Back To Democrats</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2348337/posts</link>
<description>Let the Progressive Democrats dream their redistributed wealth commie dreams because, sooner or later, reality always comes back to lay some serious bite marks on their asses. Democratic political committees have seen a decline in their fundraising fortunes this year, a result of complacency among their rank-and-file donors and a de facto boycott by many of their wealthiest givers, who have been put off by the party&#x26;#x27;s harsh rhetoric about big business. Those currently in power in the Democratic party are from its Progressive fringe and that makes for a lot of rousing class warfare rhetoric during a campaign but...</description>
<author>Stephen Kruiser</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2348337/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:49:33 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Appeals court overturns campaign finance rules</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2343149/posts</link>
<description>WASHINGTON &#x26;#x96; Independent advocacy groups will be able to spend more money to try to influence federal elections under a decision Friday from a federal appeals court that overturned rules limiting nonprofits&#x26;#x27; campaign spending. Three judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington agreed with Emily&#x26;#x27;s List, a nonprofit that backs women Democratic candidates who support abortion rights, that the regulations limited free speech rights. The Federal Election Commission enacted the rules in 2005, after concerns were raised about the amount of unlimited &#x26;#x22;soft money&#x26;#x22; contributions used to fund attacks in the 2004 election. The FEC said nonprofits would...</description>
<author>AP on Yahoo</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2343149/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 18 Sep 2009 20:28:10 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Trial of John Roberts [The Liberal Judicial Revisionism Has Begun!]</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2338829/posts</link>
<description>The Trial of John Roberts By JEFFREY ROSEN September 12, 2009 FOUR years ago, when John Roberts became chief justice of the United States, he said that he hoped to emulate the modesty and unanimity of his greatest predecessor, John Marshall. But if Chief Justice Roberts presides over a broad, ideologically divided ruling in a campaign finance case the court heard last week, he risks being remembered instead as a conservative Earl Warren. For decades conservatives have attacked Warren, who was chief justice from 1953 to 1969, as the face of liberal judicial activism. They have criticized him for presiding...</description>
<author>NYTimes</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2338829/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2009 21:54:47 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>From McCain-Feingold to Madison</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2338449/posts</link>
<description>WASHINGTON.Last March, during the Supreme Court argument concerning the Federal Election Commission&#x26;#x27;s banning of a political movie, several justices were aghast. Suddenly and belatedly they saw the abyss that could swallow the First Amendment. Justice Antonin Scalia was &#x26;#x22;a little disoriented&#x26;#x22; and Justice Samuel Alito said &#x26;#x22;that&#x26;#x27;s pretty incredible.&#x26;#x22; Chief Justice John Roberts said: &#x26;#x22;If we accept your constitutional argument, we&#x26;#x27;re establishing a precedent that you yourself say would extend to banning the book&#x26;#x22; -- a hypothetical 500-page book containing one sentence that said &#x26;#x22;vote for&#x26;#x22; a particular candidate. What shocked them, but should not have, were statements by a...</description>
<author>The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2338449/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Sun, 13 Sep 2009 05:51:36 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Supreme Court Must Throw Out Campaign Finance Laws</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2337388/posts</link>
<description>Justice Anthony Scalia made a prediction in 2003 when the Supreme Court heard oral arguments on the McCain-Feingold law in 2003: &#x26;#x22;if history teaches us anything, [it] is that when you plug one means of expression, the money will go to whatever means of expression are left.&#x26;#x22; The case the Supreme Court heard on Wednesday, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, shows that Justice Scalia was right. The case focused on a movie released during the 2008 presidential campaign, &#x26;#x22;Hillary: The Movie.&#x26;#x22; It doesn&#x26;#x27;t explicitly advocate that Hillary Clinton be defeated in her bid for the presidency, but no one...</description>
<author>Fox News</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2337388/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 17:23:38 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>2010: High court ruling may have huge impact on 2010 races [McCain-Feingold]</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2334219/posts</link>
<description>The Supreme Court on Wednesday will hear arguments from campaign finance reform advocates and opponents in a case many insiders say will be the most significant decision in more than 35 years. The case the court will hear, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, has the potential to overturn key elements of campaign finance law that prevent corporate spending on elections, a move that would open the door to millions of dollars that could not be spent previously. &#x26;#x93;This is the biggest case in campaign finance law, really, since Buckley v. Valeo in 1976,&#x26;#x94; said Rob Kelner, a partner at...</description>
<author>The Hill, Washington, DC</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2334219/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Sep 2009 22:47:10 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&#x26;#x22;Hillary: The Movie&#x26;#x22; Case Could Have Huge Implications for Campaign Finance Laws - Video 9/6/09</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2333917/posts</link>
<description>Here is video of a discussion on CNN about the possible implications of the U.S. Supreme Court hearing a case on &#x26;#x22;Hillary: The Movie,&#x26;#x22; which was put out during the 2008 Election by Citizens United. The FEC held that the movie could not be distributed on demand because it constituted a &#x26;#x22;campaign contribution,&#x26;#x22; since it is highly critical of Hillary Clinton. This case could have lasting implications for Campaign Finance laws, and just how active organized groups such as corporations and labor unions can be in political campaigns. It will be the first case heard by new Supreme Court Justice...</description>
<author>Freedom&#x27;s Lighthouse</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2333917/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 7 Sep 2009 14:35:11 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Hillary movie case could change campaign finance [McCain-Feingold] [SCOTUS]</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2333057/posts</link>
<description>WASHINGTON (AP) &#x26;#x97; The Supreme Court appears poised to wipe away limits on campaign spending by corporations and labor unions in time for next year&#x26;#x27;s congressional elections in a case that began as a dispute over a movie about Hillary Rodham Clinton. The justices return to the bench Wednesday &#x26;#x97; nearly a month early &#x26;#x97; to consider whether to overrule two earlier decisions that restrict how and when corporations and unions can take part in federal campaigns. Laws that impose similar limits in 24 states also are threatened. The court first heard arguments in March in the case of whether...</description>
<author>AP</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2333057/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 5 Sep 2009 22:21:32 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Hillary Movie Puts Campaign Finance Limits at Risk</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2332950/posts</link>
<description>The Supreme Court appears poised to wipe away limits on campaign spending by corporations and labor unions in time for next year&#x26;#x27;s congressional elections in a case that began as a dispute over a movie about Hillary Rodham Clinton. The justices return to the bench Wednesday , nearly a month early , to consider whether to overrule two earlier decisions that restrict how and when corporations and unions can take part in federal campaigns. Laws that impose similar limits in 24 states also are threatened. The court first heard arguments in March in the case of whether &#x26;#x22;Hillary: The Movie,&#x26;#x22;...</description>
<author>Philadelphia Inquirer</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2332950/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Sat, 5 Sep 2009 17:51:53 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Justices to Revisit Campaign Finance</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2331260/posts</link>
<description>WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court next week will hear arguments on whether corporations and unions have a right to spend their money on campaign advertisements, in a case that tests not only a central pillar of federal campaign-finance law but the court&#x26;#x27;s own respect for precedent.</description>
<author>The Wall Street Journal</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2331260/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Thu, 3 Sep 2009 15:25:07 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>BANNING BOOKS?
HIGH-STAKES CAMPAIGN-LAW CASE</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2330160/posts</link>
<description>THE Supreme Court seems poised to reshape cam paign-finance law, affirm ing fundamental First Amendment rights by overturning restrictions on corporate political speech when it rehears Citizens United v. FEC next Tuesday. At issue is whether the government can ban distribution of a political documentary, &#x26;#x22;Hillary: The Movie,&#x26;#x22; produced by Citizens United, a conservative group that received some corporate funding to make the film. The government argues that it can -- relying on a 1990 case, Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce, that upheld a state law banning corporate political spending, and McConnell v. FEC, the 2003 case that upheld...</description>
<author>NY Post</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2330160/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Wed, 2 Sep 2009 10:11:51 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>How about corruption reform first?</title>
<link>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2323026/posts</link>
<description>Before we implmement any sweeping changes of the American political system, how about cleaning up corruption first? In November of 2007, while campaigning for president, John Edwards, the former North Carolina Senator, said: &#x26;#x22;Washington is awash with corrupt money, with lobbyists who pass it out and with politicians who ask for it,&#x26;#x22; adding, &#x26;#x22;This election is the great moral test of our generation.&#x26;#x22; About a year later he was being investigated for use of PAC money for personal use, his once-prominent political career was buried and the turmoil of his marriage was playing out in public. Now, the wealthy trial...</description>
<author>The American Thinker</author>
<comments>http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2323026/posts#comment</comments>
<pubDate>Mon, 24 Aug 2009 05:37:04 GMT</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>