-
https://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/files/original/e30b97216d48a38001cc9752d344650e.pdf
f76878c7399b02ab8533744074d0b0e6
PDF Text
Text
FOIA Number:
2006-0469-F (2)
FOIA
MARKER
This is not a textual record. This is used as an
administrative marker by the William J. Clinton
Presidential Library Staff.
Collection/Record Group:
Clinton Presidential Records
Subgroup/Office of Origin:
Speechwriting
Series/Staff Member:
Michael Waldman
Subseries:
OA/ID Number:
14536
FoIderlD:
Folder Title:
CFR [Campaign Finance Reform] - FEC [Federal Election Commission] [3]
Stack:
Row:
Section:
Shelf:
Position:
S
92
4
7
2
�Clmton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
Divider Title:
�Aim
DIALOG(R)File 484:Periodical Abstracts Plustext
(c) 1997 UMI. All rts. re serv.
03012603
SUPPLIER NUMBER: 96381823 (TfflS IS THE FULLTEXT)
The curse of American politics
Dworkin, Ronald
New York Review of Books (GTRB), v43 nl6, pl9-24
Oct 17, 1996
TEXT:
1.
America is worried about its democracy in this election year. The
power of money in our politics, long a scandal, has now become a disaster.
Elections are fought mainly on television, in a battle of endless and
hugely expensive political ads, and candidates are trapped in spiraling
arms races of fundraising, desperately trying to raise more than their
opponents. The New York Times estimates that the 1996 presidential race
will cost between $600 million and $1 billion, that it now takes at least
$5 million to run a successful Senate campaign-in some states as much as
$30 million-and that even a seat in the House can cost $2 million. 1
Much of that money is given in large amounts by corporations and
individuals, many of whom contribute to both major parties. From January
1991 through June 1992, the RepubUcan Party raised $34.9 million and the
Democratic Party $13.1 million in "soft" money-money given to parties
rather than to candidates and used for advertising the party's message, for
voter registration, and for other activities that are exempt from legal
limits on contributions. By the same period in 1995-1996, those numbers had
exploded; the Republican Party raised $83.9 million in soft money and the
Democrats $70.3 million. The totals for each party are expected to reach
between $120 and $150 million by November. 2 The flow of "hard" money
-money that is subject to legal limits -has also dramatically increased: in
the 1994 general election, for example. Political Action Committees (PACs)
donated $172.9 million to House and Senate campaigns. (The total was $20.4
million in 1976, just after Congress enacted a law, discussed below, that
was intended to curb campaign contributions.)
The sheer volume of money raised and spent is not the only defect in
contemporary American politics. The national political "debate" is now
directed by advertising executives and political consultants and conducted
mainly through thirty-second, "sound bite" television and radio commercials
that are negative, witless, and condescending; these ads, in the view of
the authors of a recent book, Going Negative, 3 drive political moderates
into not voting, leaving thefieldto partisans and zealots. Television
newscasts, from which most Americans now leam most of what they know about
candidates and issues, are more and more shaped by rating wars, in which
network and local news bureaus are pressed to provide entertainment rather
than information or analysis, and by feature reporters, whose definition of
�success is to become celebrities themselves, with huge salaries and lecture
fees, and public recognition that often dwarfs that of the politicians they
supposedly cover.4
But money is the biggest threat to the democratic process. The time
pohticians must spend raising money in endless party functions and in more
personal ways-not only during an election campaign but while in office,
preparing for the next election-has become an increasingly large drain on
their attention. Senator Tom Harkin of Iowa complained in 1988, "As soon as
a Senator is elected here, that Senator better start raising money for the
next election 6 vears down the pike. Everyone here does it, and to deny
that is to deny the obvious and to deny what is also on the record. "5 The
great corporate contributors are not altruists or even political
ideologues~the largest of them contribute to both parties-but businessmen
anxious to influence policy or at least, as many corporate executives put
it, to insure special "access" to high officials to put the case for their
interests.
By June 30, 1996, for example, counting only contributions of $10,000
or more, the securities and investment industry had contributed $7,022,997
in soft money to the Republican Party for the 1996 elections and $5,913,511
to the Democratic Party. The largest single contributor to the Republican
Party to that date was Philip Morris, which has an enormous stake in
pending political decisions about cigarette advertising aimed at children;
it gave the Republicans $1,632,283 through June 30-and, as a small
insurance premium, $350,250 to the Democrats. Trial lawyers, on the other
hand, strongly approve of Clinton's reluctance to outlaw large damage
recoveries in civil suits against corporations; and by June 30 lawyers and
lobbyists as a group had contributed $4,816,436 to the Democrats and only
$1,199,211 to the Republicans. The appearance of corruption is inevitable
and its reality, at least in many cases, almost as certain.
The importance of money in politics means political inequality as
well. Contributors to both parties tend to favor congressional incumbents.
In Senate races this year, the thirteen Republican incumbents had already
raised, by June 30, $19.3 million and their Democratic opponents only $4.2
million; the seven incumbent Democrats running again had raised $12 million
and their opponents only $6.6 million.6 (PACs are particularly
discriminating in their gifts: in the 1994 congressional races they gave an
average of $1,139,222 to Senate incumbents against an average of $183,926
to their challengers, and an average of $262,424 to House incumbents
against $31,619 to their opponents.7) There are also sharp disparities of
resources between challengers for open seats: in New Jersey, Rep. Robert G.
Torricelli, the Republican candidate for the seat to be vacated by Senator
Bradley, had raised $6.8 million by June 30, and his Democratic opponent,
Rep. Dick Zimmer, $4.4 million.8
These differences matter: in the 1994 Senate races, winners spent on
average $4,566,452 and losers only $3,358,015-a ratio of 1.36 to 1-and in
House races winners spent an average of $530,031 and losers $283,431-a
�ratio of 1.87 to 1. Candidates with great personal wealth have an obvious
special advantage. In 1994, Michael Huffington, the unknown and apparently
inept Republican challenger to the popular Senator Dianne Feinstein in
California, spent an astonishing $28 million of his own money, and very
nearly won. Of this year's top twenty Senate campaign fund-raisers to June
30, four are challengers who were each able to contribute or lend over $1
million to their own campaigns: Republicans James B. Nicholson of Michigan
and Guy W. Millner of Georgia and Democrats Charles Sanders of North
Carolina and Mark R. Warner of Virginia.9 The most important effect of
financial inequality among candidates is not captured in any of these
figures, moreover, because, as Senator Bradley recently pointed out,
potential candidates whp are unable to raise or contribute the funds needed
to compete simply don't run at all. "If you've got a good idea and
$10,000," he added, "and I've got a terrible idea and $1 million, I can
convince people that the terrible idea is a good one. "10
2.
Money is not only the biggest problem, but in good part the root of
other problems as well. If politicians had much less to spend on
aggressive, simple-minded television spots, for example, political
campaigns would have to rely more on reporters and on events directed by
non-partisan groups, like televised debates, and political argument might
become less negative and more constructive. Money is, moreover, also the
easiest problem to solve, at least in theory. A free society cannot dictate
the tone its politicians adopt or the kind of arguments they offer the
public, or what political news or scandal reporters do or do not print, or
how carefully television commentators analyze what the candidates have
offered or opposed. But a free society can-or so it would seem-limit the
amount of money that candidates or anyone else may spend on political
campaigns. Every European democracy does this, and Europeans are amazed
that we do not. But the Supreme Court has held that we may not, that
limiting political expenditures by law would be an unconstitutional denial
of free speech, in violation of the First Amendment.
Following the Watergate scandals, Congress enacted the 1974 Electoral
Reform Act. which set upper limits or "caps," on any congressional
candidate's expenditures. But in its 1976 decision in Buckley v. Valeo. the
Supreme Court declared those limits unconstitutional. 11 The Court did
approve other provisions of the 1974 legislation, which imposed limits on
the amounts that individuals and groups can contribute to political parties
and campaigns. These permitted individuals to contribute up to $1,000 per
election to a federal candidate, up to $20,000 a year to a political party,
and up to $5,000 to a PAC. They also permitted PACs to donate $5,000 a year
to each federal candidate they support, with no limit on the total number
of candidates they choose. The Court said that though these constraints
limit the political activity of potential contributors in one respect, they
leave them free to spend as much of their own money as they wish supporting
the candidates or policies they favor in other ways-for example, by
�publishing advertisements for them not at their request-so that the
constraint on their freedom of speech is minimal. 12
Though these limitations on contributions were once hailed as
important reforms, they have proved largely ineffective. The Federal
Election Commission appointed to enforce them is made up of political
appointees-three from each party-and has not been zealous in its oversight.
Illegal practices can often not be detected until long after the election
in which they have figured, and the most likely sanction then
available-fines-can be counted as simply another election expense. Soft
money in particular has been used to evade regulation. A 1979 amendment to
the law allowed unlimited individual and corporate contributions to
political parties of money that can be used to elect candidates for state
office and for so-called "partybuilding" activities, including renting and
staffing office space, computer surveys, generic (e.g., "Vote Republican")
ads that do not explicitly support particular- federal candidates,
voter-registration campaigns, and "get out the vote" drives. Each of these
activities has been used in aid of presidential and congressional
candidates, against the spirit of the legislation, and the importance of
such funds to those campaigns is shown by the huge sums of soft money they
have raised. The New York Times recently called the soft-money exception an
enormous loophole in the system for regulating contributions.
Another important loophole was created by a provision in the 1974 Act
allowing individuals to donate up to $20,000 each to political parties. The
act limited what a party might spend, from sums so raised, for direct
political advertising "in connection with" a particular federal candidate's
campaign, according to a formula for each state based on the number of its
voters. But in an important decision this June, Colorado Republican Federal
Campaign Committee v. Federal Election Commission, the Supreme Court
sharply limited the importance of those ceilings by interpreting the words
"in connection with" in a surprisingly permissive way. 13
12 Some of the justices, dissenting in part, expressed doubts about
the sense of that distinction. Justice Byron White, for example,
illustrated the anomaly the distinction creates. "Let us suppose," he said,
"that each of two brothers spends $1 million on TV spot announcements that
he has individually prepared and in which he appears, urging the election
of the same named candidate in identical words. One brother has sought and
obtained the approval of the candidate; the other has not. The former may
validly be prosecuted under [the 1974 act]; under the Court's view, the
latter may not, even though the candidate could scarcely help knowing about
and appreciating the expensive favor." 424 U.S. 261.
Before candidates were officially nominated in the Colorado Senate
race in 1986, Tim Wirth was the strong front-runner for the Democratic
nomination, and the Colorado Republican Party ran a radio campaign against
him, using funds in excess of its limit for spending in concert with a
particular campaign. The Federal Election Commission declared that any
party expenditure sofirmlyconcentrated on a particular congressional
�election should be presumed to be orchestrated with the campaign of the
party's candidate in that election, even though no campaign official had
requested or authorized the expense; and therefore that the Republican
Party had broken the law. But though the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals
agreed, the Supreme Court reversed that court's decision, and held that the
First Amendment prevented the government from imposing any limits on what
parties can spend of their own funds when these expenditures are not
actually discussed with a candidate or his agents. Four justices-Chief
Justice Rehnquist and Justices Kennedy, Scalia, and Thomas-went further and
declared that in any case Congress lacked the power to forbid the party to
use any of its unrestricted funds to promote its candidates, even in
concert with their official campaigns.
Commentators have suggested a wide variety of reforms in an attempt to
restore some measure of financial sanity and equality to the political
process. Some of these invite candidates voluntarily to limit total
campaign expenditures in return for grants of public funds for campaigning
or the provision of free television time. Presidential elections are
financed through such grants-this year $61.8 million to each of the two
major candidates-in return for a commitment to spend no more than that sum.
And the major senatorial candidates in Massachusetts-the incumbent Senator
John Kerry and Governor William Weld-agreed, starting July 1, to limit
their expenditures to $6.9 million each. But candidates are not required to
accept these offers-Ross Perot declined the federal grant in the 1992
presidential election and spent more of his own money than he would have
received; and the use of soft money and independent party expenditures
greatly reduces the force of voluntary limitations anyway. As I said, this
year's presidential campaigns are expected actually to cost up to $1
billion in total, not just the $152 million paid in federal grants
(including $29 million to Perot).
Other suggestions for limiting the damage of the Buckley decision
apply directly to television and the other media. Max Frankel recently
suggested in The New York Times Magazine, for example, that television
networks be asked to provide free time for personal appearances by
candidates who agree not to purchase spot commercials, or for those who
wish to answer paid commercials that attack them. 14 But it is doubtful
that Congress would require networks to donate that time as a condition of
their franchise, or that the Supreme Court would permit it to do so.
Frankel hopes that the networks would cooperate voluntarily, but though the
Fox Broadcasting Corporation has announced a limited program of free time
for presidential candidates this year, it seems highly unlikely that the
networks would accept a plan as ambitious and expensive as Frankel's. In
any case, no remedy of the kinds that have been proposed is likely to be
nearly as effective as a straight legal ceiling on all campaign
expenditures by candidates or parties would be, if it were held
constitutional, and one of the strongest proponents of reform, Senator
Bradley, recently proposed a constitutional amendment to reverse the
�Buckley decision.
Was the Buckley decisionrightin principle? If so, then it would be
wrong to amend the Constitution to reverse it. It would also be wrong to
try to circumvent the decision in any of the ways I have just discussed. If
it really would violate free speech for Congress to deprive the public of
everything arichcandidate might wish to tell it in repeated television
commercials, then it must also be wrong to inducerichcandidates, by
bribing them with public money, to muzzle themselves voluntarily. So the
present disposition of most commentators-to accept the Buckley decision and
then to try to evade it-seems untenable. If we think the decision a
mistake, we should explain why and attempt, in one way or another, to
reverse it. If we think itright,we should stop what almost every
politician now seems to endorse-trying to achieve what it forbade by other
means.
3.
Was the Buckley decisionright?The Constitution's First Amendment
declares that Congress "shall make no law... abridging the freedom of
speech." These abstract words cannot mean that government must pass no law
that prevents or punishes any form of speech-that would rule out laws
against blackmail and fraud. Free speech must mean the freedom to speak or
publish when denying that freedom would damage some other individual right
that free speech protects, or when it would impair democracy itself. 15 It
is a premise of democracy, for example, that the people as a whole must
havefinalauthority over the government, not vice versa. That principle is
compromised when official censorship limits the character or diversity of
political opinion the public may hear or the range of information it may
consider, particularly-though not exclusively-when the censorship is
designed to protect government from criticism or exposure. So the Supreme
Court has ruled, as in the Pentagon Papers case, that government may not
prohibit the publication of material pertinent to judging its own
performance. 16 It is another premise of democracy that citizens must be
able, as individuals, to participate on equal terms in both formal politics
and in the informal cultural life that creates the moral environment of the
community. 17 That principle is compromised when government prohibits speech
on the ground that the convictions or tastes or preferences it expresses
are unworthy or degraded or offensive, or that they would be dangerous if
others were persuaded to embrace them. So, particularly in recent decades,
the Court has been zealous in protecting neo-Nazis, pomographers, and
flagbumers from censorship inspired by such judgments.
Neither of these two principles of democracy is violated, however, by
a legal restriction on campaign expenditures. Expenditure limits do not
protect government from criticism-incumbents, as we saw, benefit more than
challengers from unlimited spending -and they do not presuppose that any
political opinion is less worthy or more dangerous than any other. Nor
would such limits seriously risk keeping from, the public any argument or
information it would otherwise have: media advertising ofrichcandidates
�and campaigns is now extremely repetitive, and the message would not change
if the repetitions were fewer.
In the Buckley decision, however, the Court claimed another, more
general, principle of democracy. It declared that since effective speech
requires money in the television age, any legal limit on how much
pohticians can spend necessarily diminishes the overall quantity of
political speech, and violates the First Amendment for that reason. The
Court conceded that capping expenditures would permit poor candidates to
compete more effectively with rich ones. But, it said, "the concept that
government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order
to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First
Amendment." What reason might we have for accepting that view?
Two arguments are often made. The first supposes, in the spirit of
John Stuart Mill's famous defense of free speech, that a community is more
likely to reach wise political decisions the more political argument or
appeal its citizens are able to hear or read.It is certainly true that
expenditure caps would limit the quantity of political speech. If a rich
politician or a wellfinanced campaign is prevented from broadcasting as
many television ads as he or it would like, then the sum total of political
broadcasts is, by hypothesis, less than it would otherwise be. Some
citizens would indeed be prevented from hearing a message they might have
deemed pertinent.
But since the curtailed broadcasts would almost certainly have
repeated what the candidate had said on other occasions, it seems very
unlikely that the repetition would have improved collective knowledge.
Nothing in the history of the many democracies that do restrict electoral
expense suggests that they have sacrificed wisdom by doing so. In any case,
the argument that curtailing political expenditure would hinder the search
for truth and justice seems so speculative-and the potential cost in those
values so meager even if the argument is right-that it hardly provides a
reason for forgoing the conceded gains in fairness that restricting
electoral expenses would bring.
A second familiar argument is very different. It insists that the
freedom of speech that really is essential to democracy-the freedom to
criticize government or to express unpopular opinions, for example-is best
protected from official abuse and evasion by a blanket rule that condemns
any and all regulation of political speech -except, perhaps, to avoid
immediate and serious violence or a national disaster. It is better for a
community to forgo even desirable gains than to run theriskof abuse, and
the censorship of genuinely important speech, that a lessrigidrule would
inevitably pose. But this argument overlooks the fact that, in this case,
what weriskin accepting arigidrule is not just inconvenience but a
serious loss in the quality of the very democracy we supposedly thereby
protect. It seems perverse to suffer the clear unfairness of allowing rich
candidates to drown out poor ones, or powerful corporations to buy special
access to politicians by making enormous gifts, in order to prevent
�speculative and unnamed dangers to democracy that have not actually
occurred and that no one has shown are likely to occur. We would do better
to rely on our officials-and ultimately on our courts-to draw lines and
make distinctions of principle, as they do in all other fields of
constitutional law.
But though these two familiar arguments are easily countered, the
Buckley decision cited another, more profound, argument-I shall call it the
"individual-choice" argument-which I believe has been very influential
among those who support the decision even though it is rarely articulated
in full. "In the free society ordained by our Constitution," the Court
said, "it is not the government, but the people individually as citizens
and candidates and collectively as associations and political committees
who must retain control over the quantity and range of debate on public
issues in a political campaign."" We must take some care to appreciate the
force of that argument. I said that much of First Amendment law is grounded
in the ideal of democratic self-govemment-that the ultimate governors of a
society should be the people as a whole, not the officials they have
elected. That principle does not seem to apply in the case of expenditure
limitations, I said, because those limits are designed not to prevent the
public from learning any particular kind of information or hearing any
particular kind of appeal but, on the contrary, to enhance the diversity
and fairness of the pohtical debate.
But the individual-choice argument insists that instead of that
apparently admirable goal justifying the constraint, it explains what is
wrong with it, because any attempt to determine the character of the
political debate by legislation violates an important democratic right-the
right of each individual citizen to make up his own mind about what
information or message is pertinent to his decision how to use his vote.
Should he watch as much of his favorite candidate or party as possible, to
solidify or reinforce convictions he holds intuitively, or in order to arm
himself for political arguments with other citizens? Or should he watch all
candidates, including those whose personality or views he knows he detests,
when he would rather do something else? Should he take an interest in
negative ads that deride an opponent's character? Or should he try to
follow complex political argument crammed full of statistics he knows can
be manipulated?
Some people, including many who now press for expenditure limits and
other reforms, have their own clear answer to such questions. They endorse
a high-minded, "civic republican" ideal of democratic discourse. They
imagine a nation of informed citizens giving equal time and care to all
sides of important issues, and deliberating thoughtfully about the common
good rather than their own selfish interests. 19 But the individual-choice
argument insists that those who accept that ideal have norightto impose
it on others, and are therefore wrong to appeal to it as justification for
coercive measures, like expenditure caps, that deny people the right to
listen to whatever political message they want, as often as they want. In a
�genuine democracy, it insists, the structure, character, and tone of the
public political discourse must be determined by the combined effect of
individual choices of citizens making political decisions for themselves,
not by the edicts of self-styled arbiters of political fairness and
rationality. If we want to bring American politics closer to civic
republican ideals, we must do so by example and persuasion, not by the
coercive force of expenditure caps or other majoritarian rules.
It might seem natural to object to this argument that, in the real
world we live in, people cannot make their own decisions about which
political messages to watch or listen to anyway, because-those decisions
are made for them byrichor well-financed candidates whose advertisements
dominate programming. But that objection is less powerful than it might at
first seem. There is little evidence that citizens who take an active
interest in politics could not discover the statements and positions of any
serious candidate-that is, of any candidate who would have any significant
chance of winning if every voter knew his views in great detail-if they
were willing to make the effort to do so. Of course it is true, as Senator
Bradley said, that voters are much more likely to be convinced by
advertisements constantly shown during commercial breaks in popular
programming than by the less expensive campaigning that poorer candidates
can afford. If that were not true, then candidates who spent fortunes on
such advertising would be wasting their money. But it does not decrease the
freedom of a voter to choose for himself which candidate to watch when one
candidate is on television constantly and another only rarely, provided
that the voter can find the latter's message if he searches. And it would
be unacceptably paternalistic to argue that a voter should not be allowed
to watch what he wants to because he is too likely to be convinced by it.
It is also true, as I said, that many potential candidates decide not
to run because they are likely to lose when money dominates politics. But
we must distinguish between two reasons a poor candidate might have for
that decision. He might fear that voters would not leam of his existence
or policies, because he has too little money to spend on publicizing them,
or he might fear that even if voters did leam, he would lose anyway,
because the weight of money and advertisement on the other side would make
his good ideas seem terrible ones.
The appropriate remedy for the first danger, according to the
individualchoice argument, is some form of subsidy for poorer
candidates-direct grants to those whose opponents spend more than a
specified limit, for example, or free television time for poorer candidates
on special cable channels created or used for that purpose, or in specified
network slots paid for from a national fund. (Nothing in the Supreme
Court's decisions would bar such government subsidies.) And according to
the individual-choice argument, the second danger-that even candidates
subsidized in such a way could not match the advertising power of those
with enormous resources-is not one that a democracy can address through
expenditure limits, because government would then be denying citizens the
�broadcasts they wished to watch on the ground that they should not want to
watch them, or that they are too likely to be persuaded by them. Once
again, these are obviously impermissible grounds for any constraints on
speech.
4.
I emphasize the apparent strength of the individual-choice argument
not to support that argument, but to make its structure plainer, and to
suggest that we must confront it at a more basic level, by rejecting the
conception of democratic self-government on which it is based. Citizens
play two roles in a democracy. As voters they are, collectively, the final
referees or judges of political contests. But they also participate, as
individuals, in the contests they collectively judge: they are candidates,
supporters, and political activists; they lobby and demonstrate for and
against government measures, and they consult and argue about them with
their fellow citizens. The individual-choice argument concentrates
exclusively on citizens in thefirstrole and neglects them in the second.
For when wealth is unfairly distributed and money dominates politics, then,
though individual citizens may be equal in their vote and their freedom to
hear the candidates they wish to hear, they are not equal in their own
ability to command the attention of others for their own candidates,
interests, and convictions. When the Supreme Court said, in the Buckley
case, that fairness to candidates and their convictions is "foreign" to the
First Amendment, it denied that such fairness was required by democracy.
That is a mistake because the most fundamental characterization of
democracy-that it provides selfgovemment by the people as a whole
-supposes that citizens are equals not only as judges but as participants
as well.
Of course no political community can make its citizens literally their
own governors one by one. I am not my own ruler when I must obey a law that
was enacted in spite of myfierceopposition. But a community can supply
self-government in a more collective sense-it can encourage its members to
see themselves as equal partners in a cooperative political enterprise,
together governing their own affairs in the way in which the members of a
college faculty or a fraternal society, for example, govern themselves. To
achieve that sense of a national partnership in self-government, it is not
enough for a community to treat citizens only as if they were shareholders
in a company, giving them votes only in periodic elections of officials. It
must design institutions, practices, and conventions that allow them to be
more engaged in public life, and to make a contribution to it, even when
their views do not prevail. Though the question of what that means in
practice is a complex one, it seems evident that at least two conditions
must be met for any community fully to succeed in the ambition."
First, each citizen must have a fair and reasonably equal opportunity
not only to hear the views of others as these are published or broadcast,
but to command attention for his own views, either as a candidate for
office or as a member of a politically active group committed to some
�program or conviction. No citizen is entitled to demand that others find
his opinions persuasive or even worthy of attention. But each citizen is
entitled to compete for that attention, and to have a chance at persuasion,
on fair terms, a chance that is now denied almost everyone without great
wealth or access to it. Second, the tone of public discourse must be
appropriate to the deliberations of a partnership or joint venture rather
than the selfish negotiations of commercialrivalsor military enemies.
This means that when citizens disagree they must present their arguments to
one another with civility, attempting rationally to support policies they
take to be in the common interest, not in manipulative, slanted, or
mendacious pitches designed to win as much of the spoils of politics as
possible by any means. These two requirements-of participant equality and
civility-are parts of the civic republican ideal I described. But we can
now defend them, not just as features of an attractive society that
perceptive statesmen have therightto impose on everyone, but as essential
conditions of fair political engagement, and hence of selfgovemment, for
all.
If we embraced that attractive account of the conditions of
selfgovemment, we would have to accept that democracy-self-government by
the people as a whole-is always a matter of degree. It will never be
perfectly fulfilled, because it seems incredible that the politics of a
pluralistic contemporary society could ever become as egalitarian in access
and as deliberative in tone as the standards I just described demand. We
would then understand democracy not as a pedigree a nation earns just by
adopting some constitutional structure of free elections, but as an ideal
toward which any would-be democratic society must continually strive.
We would also have to accept not only that America falls short of
important democratic ideals, but that in the age of television politics the
shortfall has steadily become worse. The influence of wealth unequally
distributed is greater, and its consequences more profound, than at any
time in the past, and our politics seem daily more rancorous, ill-spirited,
and divisive. So this analysis of democracy as selfgovemment confirms-and
helps to explain-the growing sense of despair about American politics that
I began this essay by trying to describe. How should we respond to that
despair? We must understand the First Amendment as a challenge, not a
barrier to improvement. We must reject the blanket principle the Supreme
Court relied on in Buckley, that government should never attempt to
regulate the public political discourse in any way, in favor of a more
discriminating principle that condemns the constraints that do violate
genuine principles of democracy-that deny citizens information they need
for political judgment or that deny equality of citizenship for people with
unpopular beliefs or tastes, for example-but that nevertheless permits us
to try to reverse our democracy's decline.
5.
Is it realistic to hope that the Supreme Court will soon overrule or
modify the Buckley decision? If I amright,the decision was a mistake,
�unsupported by precedent and contrary to the best understanding of prior
First Amendment jurisprudence. It is internally flawed as well: its
fundamental distinction between regulating any citizen's or group's
contributions to someone else's campaign, which the Court allowed, and
regulating the expenditures of individuals or groups on their own behalf,
which it did not, is untenable. Justice Thomas remarked in his concurring
opinion in the Colorado Republican case last June that there is no
difference in principle between these two forms of political expression.
Thomas wasright-whyshould Perot be free to spend a great fortune
promoting his views in the most effective way he can-by running for
president and spending a fortune on television-while one of his passionate
supporters is not free to promote his own views in the most effective way
he can-by contributing what he can afford to Perot's campaign.
In retrospect, at least, this untenable distinction seems a compromise
designed to split the difference, allowing Congress to achieve one of its
purposes-preventing the corruption that almost inevitably accompanies
large-scale contributions-while still insisting on the sanctity of
political speech. If so, the Court's compromise has failed, because without
a direct limit on spending, any system of regulation of contributions, no
matter how elaborate, will collapse, as ours has. When politics desperately
needs money, and money desperately seeks influence, money and politics
cannot be kept far apart.
Therefore the case for overruling Buckley is a strong one. The
prospects for doing so are much less strong. Justices Ginzburg and Stevens
made plain, in a dissenting opinion by the latter, their doubts that the
First Amendment really does bar expenditure limits. But though Justice
Thomas even more openly announced himself ready to revise Buckley, he would
revise it by forbidding contribution limits as well as expenditure limits,
not by allowing limits on expenditures; and, as I said, he and three other
Justices argued for an even stronger ban on regulating expenditures than
Buckley imposed.
But the American public is becoming increasingly angered by the
political role of money. Even in 1992, before the new explosion in campaign
contributions, a poll of registered voters likely to vote showed that 74
percent agreed that "Congress is largely owned by the special interest
groups," and that 84 percent endorsed the statement that "special interest
money buys the loyalty of candidates. "2 Uf that dissatisfaction continues
to grow, and the public understands that the Buckley decision prevents the
most direct attack on the problem, the pressure for overruling it would
intensify. If the decision were overruled, the way might be opened for a
new system of regulation banning, for example, political commercials in
breaks in ordinary programming, as other democracies do, and providing free
television time, out of public funds, for longer statements by the
candidates themselves.
In any case, even if Buckley remains, we should feel no compunction in
declaring the decision a mistake, and in attempting to avoid its
�consequences through any reasonable and effective device we can find or
construct. The decision did not declare a valuable principle that we should
hesitate to circumvent. On the contrary, it misunderstood not only what
free speech really is but what it really means for free people to govern
themselves.
-September 19, 1996
Footnote:
1 Max Frankel, "TV Remedy for a TV Malady," The New York Times
Magazine, September 8, 1996. pp. 36-38. 2 Leslie Wayne, "Loopholes Allow
Presidential Race to Set a Record," The New York Times, September 8. 1996,
pp. Al, A26.
3 Stephen Ansolabehere and Shanto Iyengar, Going Negative: How
Political Ad ertisements Shrink and Polarize the Electorate (Free Press,
1995).
Footnote:
4See James Fallows's book, Breaking the News. How the Media Undermine
American Democracy (Pantheon, 1996). SQuoted in Fred Wertheimer and Susan
Weiss Manes, "Campaign Finance Reform: A Key to Restoring the Health of our
Democracy," Columbia Law Review, May 1994, p. 1133.
Footnote:
6 Charles R. Babcock, "Big Money for Big Senate Races," The Washington
Post, August 15,1996, p. A17. 7 Common Cause, "Guides to Republican and
Democratic Soft Money Donors," August-September 1996. SBabcock, "Big Money
for Big Senate Races," p. A17.
Footnote:
9 Babcock, "Big Money for Big Senate Races," p. Al 17.
'10 Wayne, "Loopholes Allow Presidential Race to Set a Record," p.
A26. 11 424 U.S. 1.
Footnote:
13 1996 U.S. Lexis 4258.
Footnote:
14"TV Remedy for a TV Malady," p. 38.
Footnote:
15Constitutional lawyers often put the point the other way round: they
say that all constraints on speech are banned in principle, and that
exceptions must be justified, one by one, as
Footnote:
special. But the vast range of acts of speech that are plainly not
protected by the First Amendment makes it analytically clearer to say that
it is protected speech that is special. The important point, however, is
that the protection is not automatic, but must be connected to some general
reason for either protecting or exempting the kind of speech in question.
16 403 U.S. 713.
17 See my Freedom's Law (Harvard University Press, 1996).
Footnote:
18 424 U.S. 57.
�Footnote:
19For an account of the history and influence of civic republican
ideas, see Law's Republic, an article by Frank Michaelman of the Harvard
Law School in Yale Law Joumal, Volume 97 (1988), p. 1493.
Footnote:
20 I discuss the issue more generally in Freedom's Law.
Footnote:
21 Reported in Wertheimer and Manes, "Campaign Finance Reform: A Key
to Restoring the Health of Our Democracy," p. 1129.
Copyright NYREV, Inc. 1996
�Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
a
Divider Title:
�Statement in Support of pvprtnming Bncklev Y. Valeo
/
October 22, 1996
In its 1976 decision, Buckley v. Valeo, the United States Supreme Court held that limiting political
expenditures by law is an unconstitutional denial of free speech in violation of the First Amendment.
We believe that the Buckley decision is wrong and should be ovcriunied. The decision did not
declare a valuable principle that we should hesitate to challenge. On the contrary, it misunderstood not only
what free speechreallyis bui what it really means forfreepeople to govern themselves.
We the undersigned call for the reconsideration and reversal of the Buckley decision.
Ronald Dworkin, Professor of Law, New York University, Oxford University
�Legal Scholars Endorsed To Dworkin Statement
10/24/96
Bruce Ackerman, Professor of Law and Political Science, Yale Law School
Peter Arenella, Professor of Law, UCLA Law School
Robert Aronson, Professor of Law, University of Washington Law School
Robert Benson, Professor of Law, Loyola Law School
Steve Boehmann, General Counsel, ACORN
John Bonifaz, Executive Director, Voting Rights Institute
Andy Buchsbaum, Associate Professor of Law, University of Michigan Law School
Erwin Chcmcrinsky, Professor of Law, University of Southern California Law School
Ronald Dworkin, Professor of Law, New York University School of Law
Milton S. Gwirtzman, member. Senior Advisory Board, Institute of Politics, John F. Kennedy School of
Government. Harvard University
Richard L. Hasen, Assistant Professor of Law, Chicago-Kent College of Law
Roland Hornet, Principal, Public Purpose Presentation
Harry Lonsdale, Founder, Campaign for Democracy
Burt Neubome, Professor of Law, New York University School of Law
H. Jefferson Powell, Professor of Law, Duke University Law School
Jamin Raskin, Associate Dean, American University Washington College of Law
John Rawls, University Professor, emeritus, Harvard University
Joe! Rogers, Professor of Law, Political Science and Sociology, University of Wisconsin-Madison
E. Joshua Rosenkranz, Executive Director, Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of
Law
Thomas M. Scanlon, Jr., Professor of Philosophy, Harvard University
Rayman L. Solomon. Associate Dean. Northwestern University School of Law
Jim Wheaton. Founder. First Amendment Project
Louis Wolcher, Professor of Law, University of Washington School of Law
�Clinton Presidential Records
Digital Records Marker
This is not a presidential record. This is used as an administrative
marker by the William J. Clinton Presidential Library Staff.
This marker identifies the place of a tabbed divider. Given our
digitization capabilities, we are sometimes unable to adequately
scan such dividers. The title from the original document is
indicated below.
Divider Title:
�Page 3
1ST
ITEM o f L e v e l 1 p r i n t e d i n FULL f o r m a t .
C o p y r i g h t (c) Oklahoma C i t y U n i v e r s i t y
OKLAHOMA CITY UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW
Spring,
1996
21 Okla. C i t y U.L.
Rev.
97
LENGTH: 24733 words
ARTICLE: F a c t - F i n d i n g i n F i r s t Amendment L i t i g a t i o n : The Case o f Campaign
Finance Reform
Roland S. Hornet, J r . *
-Footnotes* The l a s t o f F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r ' s Supreme Court law c l e r k s , Roland Hornet has
h e l d assignments as w e l l i n t h e e x e c u t i v e and l e g i s l a t i v e branches o f t h e
n a t i o n a l government, i n c l u d i n g as c o n s u l t a n t t o t h e Senate J u d i c i a r y Committee.
The p r e s e n t essay i s an o u t g r o w t h o f a 1990 f e l l o w s h i p a t t h e Smithsonian
I n s t i t u t i o n ' s Woodrow Wilson Center, f o l l o w e d by a two-year g r a n t from t h e John
and Mary R. Markle Foundation, t o i n q u i r e i n t o f r e e speech and t h e v i t a l i t y o f
American democracy.
-End
Footnotes-
TEXT:
[*97]
The a c u t e s t c o n t r o v e r s i e s which have come b e f o r e our Supreme Court, and
i n c r e a s i n g l y w i l l come, c l u s t e r around . . . t h e e t e r n a l c o n f l i c t between t h e
freedom o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l and h i s c o n t r o l by s o c i e t y . The s t u f f o f these
c o n t e s t s are f a c t s , and judgment upon f a c t s . Every tendency t o d e a l w i t h them
a b s t r a c t e d l y , t o f o r m u l a t e them i n terms o f s t e r i l e l e g a l q u e s t i o n s , i s bound t o
r e s u l t i n s t e r i l e conclusions unrelated t o a c t u a l i t i e s .
--Felix Frankfurter n l
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
n l F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r , A Note on A d v i s o r y Opinions, 37 Harv. L. Rev.
1002-03 (1924) ( c i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d ) .
-End
Footnotes-
1002,
�-
I LEXIS-NEXIS
•^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
'6<^
A
member of the Reed Klsevier pic group
ffp LEXIS-NEXIS
" ^ 5 ^ ^ number of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 4
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *97
The 103d Congress s t r u g g l e d f o r two years w i t h o u t managing t o redeem
P r e s i d e n t C l i n t o n ' s pledge o f a sweeping r e f o r m o f t h e n a t i o n ' s campaign f i n a n c e
laws--even though these laws a r e c r e d i t e d i n many q u a r t e r s w i t h h a v i n g t u r n e d
American c i t i z e n s i n t o c y n i c s and d i s b e l i e v e r s i n what t h e i r government does and
says. n2 While t h e r e i s d o u b t l e s s room f o r improvement a t
[*98]
b o t h ends o f
Pennsylvania Avenue, t h e c h i e f o b s t a c l e t o m e a n i n g f u l r e f o r m may be s a i d t o l i e
w i t h t h e t h i r d and supposedly l e a s t p o w e r f u l branch, t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme
Court.
-Footnotesn2 Jamin Raskin & John Bonifaz, Equal Protection and the Wealth Primary, 11
Yale L. & Pol'y Rev. 273, 332 (1993); Roland S. Hornet, Jr., Address at Richmond,
Virginia (Jan. 13, 1993) (notes on file with author); MacNeil-Lehrer NewsHour,
(PBS television broadcast, July 15, 1992) (interview with presidential candidate
Bill Clinton); See generally Kenneth J. Levit, Note, Campaign Finance Reform and
the Return of Buckley v. Valeo, 103 Yale L. J. 469
(1993).
-End FootnotesTwenty years e a r l i e r , s t i r r e d by t h e Watergate scandals, t h e Congress
adopted comprehensive campaign f i n a n c e r e g u l a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g mandatory spending
l i m i t s . S h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r , i n an e x p e d i t e d p r o c e e d i n g c a l l e d Buckley v.
Valeo, n3 t h e Supreme Court s t r u c k down those l i m i t s on F i r s t Amendment grounds,
w i t h o u t any h e a r i n g i n t o t h e i r a c t u a l o p e r a t i o n o r e f f e c t . n4 The c o u n t r y has
been l a b o r i n g under t h a t d i s p e n s a t i o n ever s i n c e .
- Footnotesn3 424 U.S.
1
(1976).
n4 Bucklev,
424 U.S.
at
143.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
The Court d i d r u l e i n Buckley, i n a random t e x t u a l f o o t n o t e , n5 t h a t
v o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s , t i e d t o p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g , c o u l d pass c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
muster; and t h e Congress has t r i e d e p i s o d i c a l l y s i n c e t h e n t o f o l l o w s u i t . The
problem has been t h a t v o l u n t a r y l i m i t s a r e e a s i l y sidestepped--on t o p o f which
the v o t e r s g i v e s i g n s o f r e q u i r i n g some improvement i n t h e p o l i t i c a l system
b e f o r e t h e y a r e p r e p a r e d t o spend money on i t . T h e i r remedy o f c h o i c e f o r t h i s
purpose i s mandatory spending l i m i t s . n6
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- -
n5 I d . a t 57 n.65.
n6 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a app. B., p a r t I I . D . 6 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
The Court's a b s t r a c t pronouncements i n Bucklev ought p r o p e r l y t o y i e l d t o
the c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f c o n c r e t e f a c t s showing t h e r e a l - w o r l d e f f e c t s o f l i m i t l e s s
spending on p o l i t i c a l campaigns and on t h e conduct o f o f f i c e . For t h e r e i s , as
�IP
LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS
' ^ S ^ * member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 5
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *98
the e x p e r i e n c e o f the p a s t t w e n t y years can show, no necessary correspondence
between money and speech; we may s a f e l y t u r n down t h e volume o f t h e former
w i t h o u t harm t o t h e l a t t e r . But t o g e t t o t h a t p o i n t , we w i l l need f i r s t t o push
past t h e h a b i t s and p r a c t i c e s o f mind t h a t have come--over t h e p a s t t h i r t y
years and more--to d i s c a r d c o n c r e t e f a c t s as a necessary element i n
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , and p a r t i c u l a r l y F i r s t Amendment, l i t i g a t i o n . We w i l l need t o
f i n d a way t o r e t u r n t h e domain o f f a c t s t o i t s former primacy i n such cases.
[*99]
OUTLINE
I.
Factlessness
A. A d v i s o r y Opinions
B. P r e c i p i t a t e Judgments
II.
Hazards
A. Erroneous
Decisions
B. D i s r e g a r d o f Precedent
C. P o l i t i c a l
Intrusion
D. R i g i d i t y o f Judgment
I I I . Correctives
A. Voiding
Bucklev
B. D i s r e g a r d i n g F a c t l e s s D e c i s i o n s
C. P r e s e n t i n g New Facts
D. Broadening t h e R a t i o n a l e
IV. Remedial
Process
A. L e g i s l a t i v e
Challenge
B. J u d i c i a l Argument
Appendices
A. Sample L e g i s l a t i o n
B. Specimen J u d i c i a l B r i e f
I.
FACTLESSNESS
A. A d v i s o r y Opinions
The Buckley d e c i s i o n , f o r one who r e t u r n s t o i t ,
reads more l i k e a
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
1
LEXIS-NEXIS
1
f u . Reed Elsevier pic group
1.
^^^^A* member of .the D „ J n,...:
LEXIS-NEXIS"
*
L
r L - „ J Elsevier pic group
1.
- ^ J ^ A member of -the Reed n,...:
D
�Page 6
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *99
s p e c u l a t i v e law t r e a t i s e t h a n a j u d i c i a l o p i n i o n . I t i s spread across 294 pages
of t h e U.S. Reports (424 U.S. 1-294), c o m p r i s i n g some 92 pages o f s t a t u t o r y t e x t
preceded by 143 pages o f "per curium" o p i n i o n and f o l l o w e d by another 59 pages
o f c o n c u r r i n g and d i s s e n t i n g views. The p r e v a i l i n g o p i n i o n i s f u r t h e r adorned by
an a r r a y o f 178 t e x t u a l f o o t n o t e s - - e a c h q u a l i f y i n g , e x t e n d i n g , o r l i m i t i n g t h e
reach o f t h e a n a l y s i s . I t takes t h e b e t t e r p a r t o f two days s i m p l y t o read,
diagram, and note t h e Court's c o n c l u s i o n s .
[*100]
Why was t h e Court so d i s c u r s i v e ? I n p a r t because Congress asked f o r , and t h e
Court s u p p l i e d , what was l i k e l y an u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n on t h e
v a l i d i t y o f a s t a t u t e t h a t was u n i l l u m i n e d by any c o n c r e t e s e t o f f a c t s . From
i t s e a r l i e s t t i m e s , t h e Supreme Court has h e l d t h a t i t has no power t o render
such advance, a b s t r a c t , o r a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n s . n7 I t c i t e d some o f these
d e c i s i o n s i n Buckley, as d i d t h e Court o f Appeals f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia
s i t t i n g en banc b e f o r e i t ; n8 y e t t h i s was a case where a l l seventeen judges,
murmuring t h e y never would, t h e y d i d . I t i s a t l e a s t h i g h l y q u e s t i o n a b l e whether
a d i f f e r e n t , more d i s c i p l i n e d Court, from e a r l i e r times o r from today, would
a l l o w i t s e l f t o hear o r adjudge such a case.
- Footnotesn7 See Paul M. Bator e t a l . , H a r t and Wechsler's The F e d e r a l Courts and t h e
Federal System 66 (3d ed. 1988) (documenting t h e Court's 1793 r e f u s a l t o g i v e an
a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n r e q u e s t e d by P r e s i d e n t George Washington).
n8 See Buckley
v.
Valeo,
519 F.2d 821 (D.C. Cir.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
1975).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
T h i s was n o t j u s t a t e c h n i c a l d e f e c t . The e s s e n t i a l wisdom o f t h e Court's
h i s t o r i c a b s t e n t i o n from a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n s i s u n d e r l i n e d i n Buckley by t h e
s c h o l a s t i c u n r e a l i s m o f i t s f i n d i n g s . Nowhere i s t h i s more e v i d e n t o r more
p i v o t a l than i n the s e c t i o n o f the o p i n i o n i n v a l i d a t i n g expenditure l i m i t a t i o n s :
"A r e s t r i c t i o n on t h e amount o f money a person o r group can spend on p o l i t i c a l
communication . . . n e c e s s a r i l y reduces t h e q u a n t i t y o f e x p r e s s i o n by
r e s t r i c t i n g t h e number o f i s s u e s d i s c u s s e d , t h e depth o f t h e i r e x p l o r a t i o n , and
the s i z e o f t h e audience reached." n9 T h i s i s p a t e n t l y u n t r u e , as anyone can
t e s t i f y who has gone t h r o u g h an a c t u a l campaign e x p e r i e n c e , f o r example t h e
p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign o f 1988. There i s o n l y a f i n i t e number o f "read my l i p s "
and W i l l i e Horton commercials nlO one can absorb b e f o r e r u n n i n g o u t o f depth and
b r e a d t h and d i v e r s i t y o f e x p r e s s i o n . Far from b e i n g i n s t r u c t i v e , l i m i t l e s s money
f o r endless ads has t h e documentable p r o p e n s i t y o f drowning d i s c o u r s e r a t h e r
than promoting i t .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
n9 B u c k l e v , 424 U.S. a t 19 (emphasis
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
added).
nlO The r e f e r e n c e i s t o t e l e v i s i o n commercials
1988 p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
u t i l i z e d by George Bush i n the
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
At l e a s t t h a t i s one o f i t s p r o p e n s i t i e s . The s t r i k i n g t h i n g about t h e
�W§ LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
member o('the Reed Elsevier pk group
#|~ LEXIS-NEXIS1
c
D
J
1:1
"
•^ ^ ^ A* member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
^
1
LEXIS-NEXIS
•^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 7
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *100
Buckley d e c i s i o n i s t h a t i t undertook t o pronounce on q u e s t i o n s t h a t were n o t
d e f i n e d by any evidence. I f i t were
[*101]
t r u e t h a t a law d u l y passed by
Congress c o u l d o n l y have m a l i g n a n t e f f e c t s ( " n e c e s s a r i l y r e s t r i c t s " ) , then i n
those e x t r a o r d i n a r y circumstances i t might be a p p r o p r i a t e t o r u l e t h e law
i n v a l i d i n advance o f experience w i t h i t s a p p l i c a t i o n . But s u r e l y t h e Court
should be slow t o adopt such a c o n c l u s i o n . I n o t h e r p a r t s o f i t s Buckley
o p i n i o n , f o r example, u p h o l d i n g c o n t r i b u t i o n d i s c l o s u r e requirements d e s p i t e
c l a i m s o f adverse e f f e c t s on m i n o r i t y and unpopular causes, t h e Court was
w i l l i n g t o d e f e r judgment u n t i l t h e r e were a c t u a l i n s t a n c e s o f i n j u r y , n i l
L i k e w i s e , t h e Court o f Appeals d e c l i n e d t o make a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l judgment on
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s u n t i l t h e i r e f f e c t s on F i r s t Amendment freedoms had been
d e f i n e d by evidence. n l 2 There i s an i n e s c a p a b l e element o f a r b i t r a r i n e s s ,
indeed o f j u d i c i a l w i l l f u l n e s s , i n t h e Supreme Court's f a i l u r e t o f o l l o w t h a t
standard.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nil Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
74.
n l 2 B u c k l e v v. y a l e o , 519
F.2d
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
821,
897-98
(D.C.
-End Footnotes-
Cir.
1975).
- - - - - - - -
I n Buckley, t h e m a j o r i t y chose t o decide t h e v a l i d i t y o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s
"on t h e i r f a c e , " u s i n g a s t a n d a r d o f " e x a c t i n g s c r u t i n y . " n l 3 But i n t h e absence
o f any f a c t s w i t h which t o conduct t h a t s c r u t i n y , t h e m a j o r i t y p u t t h e burden o f
p e r s u a s i o n o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f t h e law on i t s d e f e n d e r s - - c o n t r a r y t o t h e
s e t t l e d p r a c t i c e o f s o - c a l l e d " c o n s e r v a t i v e " a d j u d i c a t i o n as p r a c t i c e d , f o r
example, i n t h e 1950s by t h e Court m a j o r i t y then headed by J u s t i c e s F r a n k f u r t e r
and H a r l a n . F r a n k f u r t e r used t o t e l l h i s law c l e r k s t h a t i t s h o u l d h u r t t o
d e c l a r e a law o f Congress u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , and he went t o g r e a t l e n g t h s on
occasion (as i n t h e Communist P a r t y cases) t o f i n d some b a s i s on which t h e
judgment o f Congress c o u l d be s u s t a i n e d .
._---____-_---__
nl3 BucJcley, 424 U.S.
-Footnotes- at
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - If,
today's
expect
as t h e
1.
-End Footnotes-
as some observers m a i n t a i n , a new c o n s e r v a t i v e m a j o r i t y i s emerging i n
Court on t h e F r a n k f u r t e r - H a r l a n model, n l 4 i t i s n o t unreasonable t o
t h a t i t w i l l d e c l i n e t o p l a y f a s t and loose w i t h c o n g r e s s i o n a l judgment
Buckley Court d i d .
- Footnotes-
n l 4 This i s t h e view taken, f o r example, by t h e New York Times' Supreme Court
correspondent Linda Greenhouse. See, e.g., Linda Greenhouse, Moderates on Court
Defy P r e d i c t i o n s , N.Y. Times, J u l y 5, 1992, s e c t i o n 6, a t 1.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Of course, Congress was p l a y i n g b o t h f a s t and loose i t s e l f w i t h t h e 1974
�I LEXIS-NEXIS*
• ^ ^ ^ A member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS
'6<_
A
member of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�PageS
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 101
campaign law a t i s s u e i n t h e Bucklev case. T h i s
[*102]
was p a r t o f a
Watergate r e f o r m package t o which, q u i t e p r o b a b l y , t o o l i t t l e seasoned thought
had been g i v e n . n l 5 The Congress a c c o r d i n g l y p l a c e d a s p e c i a l v a l i d a t i n g
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on t h e Court, a s k i n g f o r e x p e d i t e d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e i n
advance o f t h e 1976 p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign then b e g i n n i n g t o t a k e shape. n l 6
"Congress was u n d e r s t a n d a b l y most concerned," t h e Court s a i d , " w i t h o b t a i n i n g a
f i n a l a d j u d i c a t i o n o f as many i s s u e s as p o s s i b l e . " n l 7 And so i t v e s t e d t h e
Court w i t h w i d e - r a n g i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n - - w h i c h , however, t h e Court was n o t o b l i g e d
t o accept and s h o u l d more p r o p e r l y have r e f u s e d on c o n s t i t u t i o n a l grounds g o i n g
back t o Marbury v. Madison. n l 8
- Footnotesn l 5 See Ralph K. Winter, J r . , Watergate and t h e Law 50-52 (1974)
problems w i t h any l e g i s l a t i v e a t t e m p t a t c u r b i n g " d i r t y t r i c k s " ) .
(noting
n l 6 S. Rep. No. 93-689, 93d Cong., 2nd Sess. (1974), r e p r i n t e d i n 1974
U.S.C.C.A.N. 5587, 5604-05.
nl7 Bucklev,
424 U.S. at
nl8 5 U.S. (1 Cranch)
117.
137
(1803).
-End
Footnotes-
The s u i t t h a t became Buckley v. Valeo was f i l e d on January 2, 1975, n l 9 t h e
f i r s t business day a f t e r t h e F e d e r a l E l e c t i o n Campaign A c t Amendments o f 1974
n20 went i n t o e f f e c t . No a c t i o n o f any s o r t had been t a k e n under o r i n pursuance
of t h e s t a t u t e , n o r had any i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e law been i s s u e d by t h e newly
c r e a t e d F e d e r a l E l e c t i o n Commission. No e v i d e n t i a r y h e a r i n g was h e l d ; i n s t e a d ,
the p a r t i e s t o t h e s u i t made " o f f e r s o f p r o o f , " accompanied by proposed f i n d i n g s
o f f a c t which were n e g o t i a t e d o u t among themselves and t h e n adopted by t h e
Court. n21
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl9 Bucklev
v. Valeo,
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
519 F.2d 821, 901 (D. C. Cir.
1975).
n20 Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974, 88 Stat. 1263 (1974)
(reproduced in extenso in Buckley,
424 U.S. at
144-235).
n21 Buckley,
519 F.2d at
902.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Somewhere i n t h i s process, t h e government's motion t o d i s m i s s t h e a c t i o n ,
because i t was premature and r a i s e d n o n j u s t i c i a b l e i s s u e s , was l o s t . n22 The
case d r i f t e d away from b e i n g a l a w s u i t and t o o k on t h e c h a r a c t e r o f a
f r e e - f o r - a l l p o l i t i c a l debate. n23
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n22 Id. at 901.
-Footnotes-
�) LEXIS-NEXIS"
I
_i ..L- D
I tl
J
_L
- *^ J^^ A1 member of the Rccd Elsevier pk. . group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
I
_i L_ B _ _ J n
._ _ l
• ^ ^ A L member of- .the Reed Elsevier pic. group
#i
^ " ^ ^
LEXIS-NEXIS
1 _
_
n
|-1
_ l
_
' #^ J^ A 1 member of the RccdI Elsevier pic . group
�Page 9
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *102
n.23 The Court went through the motions of finding an Article III controversy,
but its opinion on the point was cursory and not in keeping with the record.
Bucklev,
424 U.S. at 11-12 & n.ll.
-End
Footnotes-
S e c t i o n 315(a) o f t h e 1974 s t a t u t e n24 was p a r t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h i s s t a t e
of a f f a i r s . I t p r o v i d e d t h a t t h e " n a t i o n a l committee
[*103]
o f any
p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , o r any i n d i v i d u a l e l i g i b l e t o v o t e [may b r i n g s u i t ] t o c o n s t r u e
t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f any p r o v i s i o n o f t h i s A c t . " Those who e n t e r e d t h e s u i t ,
i n consequence--not as f r i e n d s o f t h e c o u r t b u t as p a r t i e s - - r e a d l i k e a r o s t e r
of d e b a t i n g s o c i e t i e s . They i n c l u d e d one t h i r d - p a r t y s i t t i n g s e n a t o r , James
Bucklev; one former senator and p e r i o d i c p r e s i d e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e , Eugene
McCarthy; and d i v e r s e c a u s e - o r i e n t e d groups l i k e t h e American C o n s e r v a t i v e
Union, t h e New York C i v i l L i b e r t i e s Union, Human Events I n c . , Common Cause, and
the League o f Women V o t e r s . n25 None o f them had i n any way been a f f e c t e d
c o n c r e t e l y by t h e s t a t u t e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- -
n24 2 U.S.C. section 437(h) (Supp. IV, 1974) .
n25 Bucklev,
424 U.S. at 7-8,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
9
n.5.
-End Footnotes-
Together t h i s assembly managed t o n e g o t i a t e f o r j u d i c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n
t w e n t y - e i g h t " c e r t i f i e d q u e s t i o n s " o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law, n26 which f u r n i s h e d
t h e bases f o r d e c i s i o n by t h e seventeen judges who took p a r t i n t h e review. n27
A t y p i c a l q u e s t i o n was number t h r e e , which read as f o l l o w s : "Does any s t a t u t o r y
l i m i t a t i o n [on c o n t r i b u t i o n s o r e x p e n d i t u r e s ] v i o l a t e . . . t h e F i r s t , F i f t h , o r
N i n t h Amendment . . . o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ? " n28 I t i s h a r d
t o t h i n k o f a more nakedly a b s t r a c t p r o p o s i t i o n o f law.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n26 Bucklev,
519 F.2d at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
898-901.
n27 The Supreme Court j u s t i c e s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n c l u d e d Chief J u s t i c e Burger
and J u s t i c e s Brennan, Stewart, Powell, M a r s h a l l , Blackmun, Rehnquist, and White.
The judges o f t h e Court o f Appeals f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia were Chief Judge
Bazelon and C i r c u i t Judges W r i g h t , McGowan, Tamm, L e v e n t h a l , Robinson, McKinnon,
and W i l k e r .
n28 Buckley,
519 F.2d at
898.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
That i s t h e k i n d o f p r o p o s i t i o n t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t s were designed,
h i s t o r i c a l l y , t o r e f u s e t o e n t e r t a i n . I n 1793, as i s w e l l known, t h e J u s t i c e s o f
t h e Supreme Court (which then had l i t t l e t o occupy i t ) unanimously d e c l i n e d t o
g i v e a d v i c e t o P r e s i d e n t Washington on a s e r i e s o f t w e n t y - n i n e q u e s t i o n s
propounded t o them by h i s S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e , Thomas J e f f e r s o n , p e r t a i n i n g t o
t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l law o f warship e n t r y and conduct. n29 This was a t a t i m e o f
�I LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
member of the Rccd Klsevier pi.
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
u-. of . u D - . J 11
:
1
- ^ ^ A * member ^ f the. Reed Klsevier pk group
# i LEXIS-NEXIS*
Oj J ^ A member of ihe o . - j ci....:.. _i group
»
1...
^
Reed Klsevier pk
�Page 10
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *103
a c t i v e Anglo-French n a v a l w a r f a r e , and i t would have been c o n v e n i e n t f o r t h e
f l e d g l i n g American n a t i o n t o know how t o s t a y o u t o f t r o u b l e w i t h these two
major powers. But t h e J u s t i c e s d e c l i n e d t o p r o v i d e t h e r e [*104]
quested
counsel, n o t i n g t h a t t h e y were "judges o f a c o u r t o f l a s t r e s o r t " and a check on
the o t h e r two branches o f government.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes- n29 Bator e t a l . , supra note 7, a t 66.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r ' s s c h o l a r - p a r t n e r Henry H a r t o f t h e Harvard Law School
l i k e d t o point t o t h i s decision f o r the teaching that the j u d i c i a l function i s
one o f a u t h o r i t a t i v e a p p l i c a t i o n o f g e n e r a l p r o p o s i t i o n s t o p a r t i c u l a r
circumstances. The f e d e r a l c o u r t s , i n h i s memorable phrase, a r e "organs o f sober
second t h o u g h t , " n o t f r o n t - l i n e a d v i s o r s . They s h o u l d c o n c e n t r a t e t h e i r t h i n k i n g
on s p e c i f i c and c o n c r e t e s e t s o f f a c t s t o l i m i t and focus t h e i r l e g a l
d e t e r m i n a t i o n s , and r e f r a i n from t h e chancy d i s p e r s i o n o f t h o u g h t e n t a i l e d i n
t r y i n g t o a n t i c i p a t e m u l t i p l e p o t e n t i a l i t i e s . T h i s r e s t r a i n t i s indeed e s s e n t i a l
t o t h e l e g i t i m a c y and acceptance o f j u d i c i a l i n t e r f e r e n c e i n democratic
d e c i s i o n m a k i n g , as summed up i n t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f t h e f e d e r a l j u d i c i a l power t o
genuine "Cases and C o n t r o v e r s i e s . " n30
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n30 U.S. Const., a r t . I l l ;
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
see Bator e t a l . , supra note 7, a t 67-68.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e Supreme Court has u n t i l r e c e n t l y r e f u s e d t o e n t e r t a i n
a b s t r a c t , h y p o t h e t i c a l , o r c o n j e c t u r a l q u e s t i o n s - - e v e n when Congress has t h r u s t
the o c c a s i o n upon them. I n Muskrat v. U n i t e d S t a t e s , n31 a l e a d i n g a u t h o r i t y on
the p o i n t , Congress a u t h o r i z e d a s u i t i n an I n d i a n - p r o p e r t y m a t t e r " t o determine
the v a l i d i t y o f c e r t a i n a c t s o f Congress." n32 The Supreme Court h e l d t h e a c t i o n
t o be n o n j u s t i c i a b l e , t h a t i s , beyond i t s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l power, s i n c e t h e s u i t
was a u t h o r i z e d n o t t o s e t t l e i n d i v i d u a l c l a i m s b u t t o s e t t l e t h e s t a t u s o f
l e g i s l a t i o n . n33
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n31 219
U.S.
n32 Id. at
n33 Id. at
346
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
(1911).
348.
362-63.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - -
The p a r a l l e l w i t h Bucklev v. Valeo s h o u l d be e v i d e n t . n34
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
the
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
n34 Compare t h e language i n t h e 1974 s t a t u t e , a u t h o r i z i n g s u i t " t o c o n s t r u e
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f . . . t h i s A c t . " Federal E l e c t i o n Campaign A c t
�T
M
§)
U
LEXIS-NEXIS*
I
*'
D
I Cl
l„
- ^ ^ A A member ot the Reed Elsevier pk group
^^^^^
#i
^ ^ ^ ^
U
LEXIS-NEXIS*
I
D
ri
:
i.
• ^ ^ A A member of the Rccdi Elsevier pk group
^^^^^
# i LEXIS-NEXIS*
^ " ^ ^
i
D
J r7i
:
_i_
' i^L5^^) A A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 11
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *104
Amendments o f 1974, s e c t i o n 3 1 5 ( a ) , 88 S t a t . 1263, 1285 (1974).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
B. P r e c i p i t a t e Judgments
Even when t h e Court has t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l power t o hear a case, i t r e t a i n s
the d i s c r e t i o n n o t t o decide premature o r h y p o t h e t i c a l q u e s t i o n s . Over t h e
years, a whole panoply o f j u d i c i a l - r e s t r a i n t i n s t r u m e n t s has been developed f o r
t h i s pur[*105]
p o s e - - c e r t i o r a r i ( s t a t u t o r y d i s c r e t i o n ) , t o begin with--but
beyond t h a t , such judge-made d o c t r i n e s as " s t a n d i n g , " " r i p e n e s s , " and " p o l i t i c a l
q u e s t i o n s . " n35 Any one o f these c o u l d have been used t o d e c l i n e t o a d j u d i c a t e
Buckley v. Valeo.
-Footnotesn35 See generally Alexander M. Bickel, The Passive Virtues, 75 Harv.
40
(1961)
L.
Rev.
.
-End
Footnotes-
I n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. UAW, n36 --a case s t r i k i n g l y on p o i n t - - J u s t i c e
F r a n k f u r t e r f o r t h e Court d e c l i n e d a c h a l l e n g e t o t h e v a l i d i t y o f a campaign
f i n a n c i n g law b a r r i n g c o r p o r a t e and l a b o r u n i o n e l e c t i o n e x p e n d i t u r e s . A u n i o n
o f f i c i a l was charged w i t h u s i n g u n i o n dues t o sponsor campaign advocacy on
t e l e v i s i o n . The law a t i s s u e was s a i d t o be i n v a l i d "on i t s f a c e , " as an
i n v a s i o n o f f r e e speech. F r a n k f u r t e r r e f u s e d t o pass on t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
i s s u e , n o t i n g t h a t t h e r e were no f a c t s i n t h e r e c o r d and t h a t on t r i a l t h e i s s u e
might go away. ( I n f a c t t h e o f f i c i a l was a c q u i t t e d and t h e argument
disappeared.) The o p i n i o n compared t h i s case t o t h e Dred S c o t t d e c i s i o n , n37 a
s e l f - i n f l i c t e d j u d i c i a l wound i n which t h e Court had decided a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
q u e s t i o n i t d i d n o t have t o reach.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n36 352
U.S.
n37 Scott
v.
567
-Footnotes-
- - - - -
(1957).
Sandford,
60 U.S.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(19
How.)
393
(1857).
-End Footnotes-
- - - -
S i m i l a r l y i n U n i t e d S t a t e s C i v i l S e r v i c e Commission v. N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n
of L e t t e r C a r r i e r s , n38 J u s t i c e White f o r a d i v i d e d Court r e f u s e d a c h a l l e n g e t o
t h e f a c i a l v a l i d i t y o f Hatch A c t p r o v i s i o n s p r o h i b i t i n g f e d e r a l employee
endorsements o f p a r t i s a n candidates i n broadcasts, l i t e r a t u r e , o r a t p o l i t i c a l
p a r t y meetings. White's o p i n i o n s t a t e d : "As we see i t , our t a s k i s n o t t o
d e s t r o y t h e A c t i f we can, b u t t o c o n s t r u e i t , i f c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e w i l l o f
Congress, so as t o comport w i t h c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n s . " n39
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - n38
413
U.S.
548
n39
I d . a t 571.
(1973).
- - Footnotes-
�) LEXIS-NEXIS
• ^ ^ ^ A member of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS
" 6 < ^ member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS
' 6 < ^ member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 12
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *105
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Again, t h e c o n t r a s t w i t h Buckley v. Valeo s h o u l d be p l a i n .
J u s t i c e White's s e n s i t i v i t y t o Congress reappeared
Buckley t o t h e i n v a l i d a t i o n o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s :
i n h i s dissent i n
The Court s t r i k e s down t h e p r o v i s i o n , s t r a n g e l y enough c l a i m i n g more i n s i g h t
as t o what may i m p r o p e r l y i n f l u e n c e candidates t h a n i s possessed by t h e m a j o r i t y
of Congress t h a t passed t h i s b i l l and t h e P r e s i d e n t
[*106]
t h a t s i g n e d i t . Those s u p p o r t i n g t h e b i l l u n d e n i a b l y i n c l u d e d many seasoned
p r o f e s s i o n a l s who have been deeply i n v o l v e d i n e l e c t i v e processes and who have
viewed them a t c l o s e range over many years . . . . I would t a k e t h e word o f
those who know . . . . n40
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n40 Bucklev,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes- -
261.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
P a r t i c u l a r l y was t h i s so s i n c e t h e Court had no f a c t u a l b a s i s on which t o
gainsay Congress' judgment. "The r e c o r d b e f o r e us," s a i d J u s t i c e White, "no more
s u p p o r t s t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e communicative e f f o r t s o f c o n g r e s s i o n a l and
p r e s i d e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e s w i l l be c r i p p l e d by t h e e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n s t h a n i t
supports t h e c o n t r a r y . " n41
- Footnotesn41 Id. at 263.
-End
Footnotes-
I n f a c t , t h e committees t h a t f a s h i o n e d t h e e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n s had been
at p a i n s t o do so c o n s i s t e n t l y w i t h t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . n42 The Senate r e p o r t on
the s t a t u t e showed b i p a r t i s a n support f o r those l i m i t a t i o n s , which t h e Committee
found t o be "both necessary and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . " n43 A d m i t t e d l y t h e r e were
" F i r s t Amendment i s s u e s . " n44 But t o l i m i t c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i t h o u t a l s o l i m i t i n g
e x p e n d i t u r e s would be t o a l l o w i n d i r e c t l y what was p r o h i b i t e d d i r e c t l y . "Your
Committee does n o t b e l i e v e t h e F i r s t Amendment r e q u i r e s such a wooden
c o n s t r u c t i o n . " n45
- Footnotesn42 S. Rep. No. 93-689, 93d Cong., 2nd Sess. (1974), r e p r i n t e d i n 1974
U.S.C.C.A.N. 5587, 5604-05.
n43
I d . a t 5604.
�^^^^^<TM
^^^^^^™
LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
^^^^^H**
LEXIS-NEXIS*
m c i T 1
'
J c r
of rhe Reed Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS*
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 13
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *106
n44 See i d . a t 5604-05.
n45 I d . a t 5605.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
Such a judgment may be a r g u a b l e , b u t i t i s a t l e a s t e n t i t l e d t o r e s p e c t , and
under t r a d i t i o n a l j u d i c i a l d o c t r i n e s i t would have r e c e i v e d i t . J u s t i c e
Powell, who r e g r e t t a b l y missed t h i s p o i n t i n Bucklev, was e l o q u e n t about i t on
o t h e r occasions. I n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. Richardson, n46 w h i l e c o n c u r r i n g i n a
d e n i a l o f c i t i z e n s t a n d i n g t o c h a l l e n g e t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f CIA b u d g e t i n g
p r a c t i c e s , Powell observed:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n46
418
U.S.
166
-Footnotes- -
(1974).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
Repeated and e s s e n t i a l l y head-on c o n f r o n t a t i o n s between t h e l i f e - t e n u r e d
branch and t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e branches o f government w i l l n o t , i n t h e l o n g r u n ,
be b e n e f i c i a l t o e i t h e r . The p u b l i c c o n f i d e n c e e s s e n t i a l t o
[*107]
the former and t h e v i t a l i t y c r i t i c a l t o t h e l a t t e r may w e l l erode i f we do
not e x e r c i s e s e l f - r e s t r a i n t i n t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f our power t o n e g a t i v e t h e
a c t i o n s o f t h e o t h e r branches. n47
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n47 I d . a t 188
-Footnotes-
( P o w e l l , J., c o n c u r r i n g ) .
-End
Footnotes-
T h i s i s t h e language o f a u t h e n t i c j u d i c i a l c o n s e r v a t i s m , o f which J u s t i c e
Powell t o o i s a model f i g u r e . I f t h e c u r r e n t Court i s indeed choosing t o move i n
t h a t d i r e c t i o n , i t w i l l be moving away from t h e Buckley d e c i s i o n .
Another s t a l w a r t o f a u t h e n t i c j u d i c i a l c o n s e r v a t i s m was J u s t i c e Robert
Jackson, who a l s o served as A t t o r n e y General and S o l i c i t o r General under
P r e s i d e n t Roosevelt. H i s landmark book, The S t r u g g l e f o r J u d i c i a l Supremacy, n48
d e s c r i b e d t h e d i s t o r t i o n s t o t h e democratic system t h a t occur when t h e f e d e r a l
c o u r t s , and p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e Supreme Court, o v e r s t e p t h e i r bounds.
" C o n s t i t u t i o n a l l a w s u i t s , " he warned, "are t h e s t u f f o f power p o l i t i c s i n
America. Such p r o c e e d i n g s , " which he judged i l l - s u i t e d t o d e v i s i n g g e n e r a l r u l e s
of s o c i a l p o l i c y , "may f o r a g e n e r a t i o n o r more d e p r i v e an e l e c t e d Congress o f
power." n49 But e v e n t u a l l y t h e r e w i l l come a r e a c t i o n , perhaps an e x p l o s i v e one
l i k e P r e s i d e n t F r a n k l i n Roosevelt's C o u r t - p a c k i n g p l a n o f 193 7, t o r e e s t a b l i s h a
w o r k i n g balance between "the p r i n c i p l e s o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e government and t h e
opposing p r i n c i p l e o f j u d i c i a l a u t h o r i t y . " n50
�f f i LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
member of ihe Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
D
1
—
—
'• ^ ^ ^ A* member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
1
1
- ^ ^ A* member of the •>—-« Elsevier pic group
Reed
�Page 14
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *107
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
n48
Robert H. Jackson, The S t r u g g l e f o r J u d i c i a l Supremacy (1941) .
n49
I d . a t 287.
n50
Id. at v i .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
The recovery of that balance i s among the e s s e n t i a l
needed r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of Buckley v. Valeo.
II.
values a t stake i n the
Hazards
The Supreme Court i n Buckley may have been drawn o u t o f balance by i t s
s e l f - i n v e n t e d p r a c t i c e o f d e c i d i n g F i r s t Amendment c h a l l e n g e s "on t h e i r f a c e , "
i n advance o f a p p l i c a t i o n , w i t h o u t t h e b e n e f i t o f c l a r i f y i n g f a c t s . n51 As t h e
Court e x p l a i n e d i n Bigelow v. V i r g i n i a , n52 i t s d o c t r i n e o f " f a c i a l o v e r b r e a d t h "
i n v i t e s a p r i v a t e p a r t y t o a c t as a k i n d o f p u b l i c o f f i c i a l empow[*108]
ered t o c h a l l e n g e r e g u l a t o r y p r o v i s i o n s t h a t might t h r e a t e n o t h e r s w i t h t h e l o s s
of F i r s t Amendment freedoms. n53 I t i s enough, f o r t h i s purpose, t o show t h a t
the law i n q u e s t i o n might o p e r a t e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y i n unknown f u t u r e
a p p l i c a t i o n s . n54
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n5l See Bucklev,
n52 421
U.S.
n53 Id. at
424
809
U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
30-31.
(1975).
815-18.
nB4 I n o t h e r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g s , f o r example, a f a i r t r i a l , t h i s i s n o t
a l l o w e d . "We have n o t r e c o g n i z e d an 'overbreadth' d o c t r i n e o u t s i d e t h e l i m i t e d
c o n t e x t o f t h e F i r s t Amendment." U n i t e d S t a t e s v . S a l e r n o , 481 U.S. 739, 745
(1987) ( B a i l Reform A c t ) .
-End
Footnotes-
What t h i s means i n p r a c t i c e i s t h a t t h e l i t i g a n t b e f o r e t h e Court i s
t y p i c a l l y w i t h o u t f a c t s capable o f showing t h e a c t u a l impact o f a r e g u l a t i o n on
somebody e l s e ' s f u t u r e freedom. "The c l a i m t h a t a s t a t u t e i s bad on i t s face
because overbroad does n o t t u r n on t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e f a c t u a l data g e n e r a t e d
by a p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n . " n55 The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h i s d e p a r t u r e has been
t h a t F i r s t Amendment freedoms a r e f r a g i l e and r e q u i r e v i g i l a n c e , l e s t some
f u t u r e e x p r e s s i o n be " c h i l l e d " o r i n t i m i d a t e d and t h e r e b y w i t h h e l d . n56
-Footnotesn55 Note, The First Amendment Overbreadth Doctrine, 83 Harv.
(1970)
.
L. Rev.
844,
863
�fP
LEXIS-NEXIS-^^^A
member o f the R c c d Elsevier p k group
A
LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^O ^ A
• ^ *
1
f
D
J
—
—
1member -of the Reed Elsevier pk group
® i LEXIS-NEXIS'
*
>
- ^ ^ A member of the n J r-,
Reed Elsevier pit group
�Page 15
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 108
n56
See g e n e r a l l y Henry P. Monaghan, Overbreadth, 1981 Sup. C t . Rev. 1 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
T h i s s o l i c i t u d e , w h i l e a p p e a l i n g , ignores t h e r e a l i t y - - o f t e n c i t e d by
J u s t i c e F r a n k f u r t e r i n c o n v e r s a t i o n - - t h a t F i r s t Amendment p r o t a g o n i s t s t e n d t o
be w e l l - h e e l e d media and p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t a r e e n t i r e l y capable o f
l o o k i n g a f t e r t h e i r own a f f a i r s . ( F o u r t h Amendment p a r t i e s , by c o n t r a s t , those
who might have t h e i r doors beaten down a t t h r e e i n t h e morning, F r a n k f u r t e r
t h o u g h t g e n e r a l l y d e s e r v i n g o f a j u d i c i a l champion, which he proposed t o be.)
The problem w i t h l i t i g a n t s i n a t l e a s t some F i r s t Amendment s e t t i n g s i s n o t
i n t i m i d a t i o n a t a l l b u t undue z e a l , as evidenced by t h e c a t a r a c t o f p o l i t i c a l
a c t o r s and a s s o c i a t i o n s t h a t s p i l l e d i n t o t h e Buckley courtroom. n57 The
r e a l i t i e s b e h i n d t h e a s s e r t i o n o f a p r e m o n i t o r y " c h i l l " have n o t been u n i f o r m l y
established.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n57
-Footnotes- -
See B u c k l e y , 424 U.S. a t 7-8.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
From a h i s t o r i c a l s t a n d p o i n t i t i s w o r t h remarking t h a t t h e e a r l i e s t o f t h e
modern d e c i s i o n s c i t e d f o r t h e Court's " f a c i a l o v e r b r e a d t h " d o c t r i n e i n F i r s t
Amendment cases i s NAACP v. B u t t o n . n58 That was a case f i r s t argued and decided
i n the pre[*109]
v i o u s Term, i n an u n p u b l i s h e d m a j o r i t y o p i n i o n by J u s t i c e
F r a n k f u r t e r t h a t s u s t a i n e d t h e V i r g i n i a r e s t r i c t i o n s on p o l i t i c a l l i t i g a t i o n a t
issue i n t h a t case. n59 I n t h e s p r i n g o f 1962, however, F r a n k f u r t e r s u f f e r e d t h e
s t r o k e t h a t removed him from t h e Court, and J u s t i c e W h i t t a k e r , who had v o t e d
w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y , completed h i s planned f i v e - y e a r s e r v i c e and r e s i g n e d . The
NAACP case was t h e n s e t down f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n and emerged i n 1963 as an
about-face r e v e r s a l o f i t s o r i g i n a l d e c i s i o n .
- Footnotes-
U.S.
n58 371 U.S.
809, 816
n59
415, 432-33
(1975).
(1923),
cited
in, e.g., Bigelow
Unpublished O p i n i o n o f Mr. J u s t i c e F r a n k f u r t e r
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
v.
Virginia,
421
(on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I f a s i n g l e p o i n t o f j u d i c i a l d e p a r t u r e i s t o be l o c a t e d , i t may be here,
w i t h t h e breakup o f t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e m a j o r i t y under J u s t i c e F r a n k f u r t e r t h a t had
h e l d t h e Supreme Court i n check a g a i n s t p r e c i p i t a t e F i r s t Amendment
d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . Again, i f today t h e r e s h o u l d be a d i s p o s i t i o n o r d e s i r e t o have
the c u r r e n t Court r e t u r n t o p r e v i o u s l y s e t t l e d p r i n c i p l e s o f j u d i c i a l r e s t r a i n t ,
t h i s p o i n t o f h i s t o r y s h o u l d prove i n s t r u c t i v e .
At t h e moment, a t l e a s t , t h e r e i s l i t t l e s i g n o f such a d i s p o s i t i o n , a t
l e a s t among academic commentators. A l t h o u g h t h a t community i s by no means
m o n o l i t h i c , a m a j o r i t y o f i t s members seem now t o f a v o r what i s c a l l e d t h e
" p u b l i c a c t i o n " model o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a d j u d i c a t i o n , d i s p e n s i n g w i t h o r
s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e l a x i n g t h e r e q u i r e m e n t t h a t judgments about t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n be
�\ LEXIS-NEXIS"
i
D
I n
:
_i
- ^ J ^ AA member of rhe Reed Elsevier pk. group
-
# i LEXIS-NEXIS
i
r>
i-i
_•
. . ._
- L — J k member of the Rccdi Elsevier pk. group
^^A
LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
member of rhe Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 16
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *109
i s s u e d by t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t s o n l y as an i n c i d e n t o f s e t t l i n g some c o n c r e t e
d i s p u t e between l i t i g a n t s . n60 I f change i s t o come, i t may have t o be from
another q u a r t e r .
- Footnotesn60 See t h e l i s t o f s c h o l a r l y w r i t i n g s i n Bator e t a l . ,
n.3.
-End
supra n o t e 7, a t 80
Footnotes-
There a r e r e c o g n i z e d dangers t o t h e work and t h e s t a n d i n g o f t h e Supreme
Court from p e r s i s t i n g i n F i r s t Amendment f a c t l e s s n e s s . Such dangers i n c l u d e t h e
d i s t r a c t i o n o f t h e Court from i t s p r o p e r r o l e , i t s d i s t a n c i n g from needed
i n f o r m a t i o n , and i t s i n t r u s i o n i n t o t h e work o f t h e p o l i t i c a l branches o f
government. n61 These and r e l a t e d hazards i n v i t e our f u r t h e r a t t e n t i o n .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - Footnotes-
n61 I d . a t 8 1 .
-End
Footnotes-
[*110]
A. Erroneous
Decisions
The Supreme Court i n Buckley drew a d i s t i n c t i o n between u n l i m i t e d campaign
c o n t r i b u t i o n s , which i t t h o u g h t c o u l d have a c o r r u p t i n g e f f e c t , and u n l i m i t e d
e x p e n d i t u r e s , which i t b e l i e v e d c o u l d n o t . n62 A w e a l t h y c a n d i d a t e , i t s a i d ,
c o u l d n o t c o r r u p t h i m s e l f by drawing on h i s own o r h i s f a m i l y ' s r e s o u r c e s . n63
L i k e w i s e , independent e x p e n d i t u r e s - - n o t t o a c a n d i d a t e b u t on h i s b e h a l f - - c o u l d
s t i r no e x p e c t a t i o n o f reward. n64 More t h a n t h a t , t h e o v e r a l l e x p e n d i t u r e
l i m i t s p l a c e d by Congress on campaigns c o u l d do n o t h i n g by themselves t o
r e s t r i c t c o r r u p t i o n . The concern expressed by t h e c o u r t o f appeals t h a t
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s would be necessary t o c o n t a i n c i r c u m v e n t i o n o f t h e
c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s , n65 was d i s m i s s e d by t h e Court as "not p e r s u a s i v e . " n66 How
p e r s u a s i v e have t h e Supreme Court's own judgments t u r n e d o u t t o be?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n62 Bucklev,
n6 3 Id. at 53
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
32-34.
n.59.
n64 I d . a t 78-80.
n65 Buckley,
519 F.2d
at
859.
n66 Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
55.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Court's removal o f l i m i t s on s o - c a l l e d independent e x p e n d i t u r e s l e d
�f|~ LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
f y LEXIS-NEXIS
1
u . . of u . Reed ,
-^ ^ ^ A member ^ - .the D . - J Elsevier pk group
^
C
-
® k LEXIS-NEXIS
*
^
•
......
- ^ ^ A member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 17
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *110
d i r e c t l y , i n t h e 1988 p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n s , t o t h e W i l l i e H o r t o n ads, which
were w i d e l y accounted t o have been among t h e basest and most i n f l u e n t i a l p i e c e s
of e l e c t o r a l d i s t o r t i o n i n modern t i m e s . n67 I t i s a t l e a s t n o t c l e a r t h a t
P r e s i d e n t Bush c o u l d have won t h a t e l e c t i o n w i t h o u t these d i s c r e d i t e d ads. n68
When t h e same "independent" promoter showed up i n 1992 w i t h a t e l e v i s e d
i n v i t a t i o n t o v i e w e r s t o w r i t e i n f o r an account o f Governor C l i n t o n ' s p e r s o n a l
i n d i s c r e t i o n s , and Bush s t r o v e t o d i s t a n c e h i m s e l f from t h i s e f f o r t , i t was
d i f f i c u l t f o r him t o sound a u t h e n t i c . n69
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n67 See g e n e r a l l y K a t h l e e n H. Jamieson, D i r t y P o l i t i c s : Deception,
D i s t r a c t i o n , and Democracy 16-23 (1992) .
n68 Id. at
16-17.
n69 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . C . and app. B.II.B.4-6; see a l s o Raskin &
B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 329.
-End
Footnotes-
The Supreme Court's removal o f l i m i t s on p e r s o n a l campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s l e d
d i r e c t l y , i n t h e 1992 e l e c t i o n , t o t h e candidacy o f Ross P e r o t , who vowed t o
spend $ 100 m i l l i o n o r
[*111]
more from h i s m u l t i b i l l i o n d o l l a r f o r t u n e t o
g a i n t h e Presidency. n7 0 To a c c u s a t i o n s t h a t t h i s would amount t o b u y i n g t h e
e l e c t i o n , Perot responded, "I'm b u y i n g i t f o r t h e American people." n71 Of
course, h i s opponents had t o equip themselves f i n a n c i a l l y t o keep pace. n72
-Footnotesn70 Michael I s i k o f f , Perot Gives Go-Ahead t o Continue B a l l o t D r i v e , Wash.
Post, J u l y 19, 1992, a t A18.
n71 C a t h e r i n e S. Manegold, The 1992 Campaign: Candidate's Record; Perot No
Longer U n f a m i l i a r o r Unmarked, Has Yet t o L i v e Down C r i t i c i s m , N.Y. Times, Oct.
1, 1992, a t A19.
n72 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . C . and app. B.II.B.7-9; see a l s o Raskin &
B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 328-29.
-End
Footnotes-
The Court's removal, f i n a l l y , o f l i m i t s on t o t a l campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s l e d
d i r e c t l y t o t h e breakdown o f t h e p r e s i d e n t i a l p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g system which was
supposed t o be c o n d i t i o n e d , and v a l i d a t e d , by t h e c a n d i d a t e s ' v o l u n t a r y
acceptance o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s . n73 The emergence o f u n l i m i t e d " s o f t " money,
f u n n e l e d t h r o u g h p a r t y committees f o r c a n d i d a t e expenses, has made a nonsense o f
t h i s b a r g a i n . n74
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n73 Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
95,
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
107-08.
n74 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . C . and app. B.II.B.10-12; see a l s o Raskin &
B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 327-28; Charles R. Babcock, Both P a r t i e s Raise
�II
LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ ^ A member of ihe Reed Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS*
• ^ | ^ A member of rhe Rccd Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 18
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *111
M i l l i o n s i n " S o f t Money," Wash. Post, J u l y 26, 1992, a t A l (summarizing a Center
f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s s t u d y on l a r g e c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e major p o l i t i c a l
p a r t i e s ' n a t i o n a l committees).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B. D i s r e g a r d o f Precedent
The Court c o u l d have avoided these e r r o r s and mischances by f o l l o w i n g i t s
own p r i o r d e c i s i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g "speech" from "conduct."
There was a l o n g a r r a y o f such "conduct" cases, c o n c e r n i n g such t h i n g s as
p e r m i t r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r speeches o r d e m o n s t r a t i o n s , i n which t h e Court had
upheld reasonable, c o n t e n t - n e u t r a l r e s t r i c t i o n s on F i r s t Amendment e x p r e s s i o n ,
i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f o r d e r o r harmony. n75 As t h e l a t e dean o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law
s c h o l a r s , Paul A. Freund, p u t t h e m a t t e r f o u r years b e f o r e Buckley, "We a r e
d e a l i n g [ i n campaign f i n a n c e ] n o t so much w i t h t h e r i g h t o f p e r s o n a l e x p r e s s i o n
or even a s s o c i a t i o n , b u t w i t h d o l l a r s and d e c i b e l s . And j u s t as t h e
[*112]
volume o f sound may be l i m i t e d by law, so t h e volume o f d o l l a r s may be l i m i t e d ,
w i t h o u t v i o l a t i n g t h e F i r s t Amendment." n76
- Footnotesn75 See, e . g . , K o v a c s v . C o o p e r , 336 U . S . 77 (1949)
New H a m p s h i r e , 312 U . S . 569 (1941) ( s t r e e t r a l l i e s ) .
(sound t r u c k s ) ;
Cox v .
n76 Paul A. Freund, Commentary, i n F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n o f Campaign Finance:
Some C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Questions 7 1 , 72 ( A l b e r t J . Rosenthal ed., 1972) .
-End
Footnotes-
The Court i n s i s t e d however, i n i t s a b s t r a c t d e l i b e r a t i o n s , t h a t money was
somehow d i f f e r e n t , i n t h a t i t s l i m i t a t i o n would impose " d i r e c t q u a n t i t y
r e s t r i c t i o n s on p o l i t i c a l communication and a s s o c i a t i o n . " n77 And, as we have
seen, t h e Court d e c l a r e d t h a t such q u a n t i t y l i m i t s must i n e v i t a b l y i m p o v e r i s h
p o l i t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n . n78
-Footnotes- n77 Bucklev,
424
U.S.
at
18.
n78 Id. at 19.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
One might t h i n k t h a t e f f e c t i v e p o l i t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n would have more t o do
w i t h t h e q u a l i t y t h a n t h e q u a n t i t y o f speech. Indeed t h e modern p a t r i a r c h o f
f r e e speech t h e o r y , Alexander M e i k l e j o h n , reminded us t h a t t h e town
m e e t i n g - - t h a t exemplar o f democracy--has always had and r e q u i r e s a moderator t o
e n f o r c e r u l e s o f r e c o g n i t i o n and germaneness on i t s p r o c e e d i n g s . n79 T h i s i s
what a l l o w s t h e business o f t h e meeting t o be t r a n s a c t e d : "The town meeting, as
i t seeks f o r freedom o f p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n o f p u b l i c problems, would be w h o l l y
i n e f f e c t u a l u n l e s s speech were thus a b r i d g e d . " n80
-Footnotes-
�LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A member of rhe Kccd Klsevier pin group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS• ^ ^ A member of ihe Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 19
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *112
n79 Alexander Meiklejohn, Political Freedom: The Constitutional Powers of the
People 24-28 (1960). See also Harry Kalvan, Jr., The Concept of the Public
Forum, 1965 Sup. Ct. Rev. 1. "In any theory, speech has always been dependent on
some commitment to order and etiquette." Id. at 23.
n80 M e i k l e j o h n , supra note 79, a t 25.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
But t h e r e i s a c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e a t work i n t h e Court's d e c i s i o n t h a t
o v e r r i d e s such commonplace o b s e r v a t i o n s . The idea t h a t n o i s e l e v e l s , o r money
f l o w s , might u s e f u l l y be a t t e n u a t e d f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f a p o l i t i c a l audience was
judged t o be c o n t r a r y t o t h i s i m p e r a t i v e . "The concept t h a t government may
r e s t r i c t t h e speech o f some elements o f our s o c i e t y i n o r d e r t o enhance t h e
r e l a t i v e v o i c e o f o t h e r s i s w h o l l y f o r e i g n t o t h e F i r s t Amendment . . . ." n81
This begged t h e q u e s t i o n , o f course, whether money was speech o r t o be t r e a t e d
l i k e i t . And i t overrode t h e precedent o f t h e "Fairness D o c t r i n e " n82 i n
[*113]
b r o a d c a s t i n g , which was designed p r e c i s e l y t o e q u a l i z e speech
o p p o r t u n i t i e s and which t h e Supreme Court had r o u n d l y upheld j u s t seven years
b e f o r e . n83
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n81 Bucfrley, 424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
48-49.
n82 The "Fairness Doctrine" was an FCC-imposed requirement that public issues
be presented by broadcasters and that both sides of those issues receive fair
coverage. i?ed Lion Broadcasting
v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367, 375-77
(1969).
n83 I d . a t 367-401. The Court i n Buckley c i t e d Red L i o n b u t p u r p o r t e d t o
d i s t i n g u i s h i t on grounds t h a t "the presumed e f f e c t o f t h e f a i r n e s s d o c t r i n e i s
one o f 'enhancing t h e volume and q u a l i t y o f coverage' o f p u b l i c i s s u e s . "
B u c k l e y , 424 U.S. a t 50 n . 55. This i s a purpose t h a t i s f a c t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l
w i t h t h a t o f mandatory spending l i m i t s . See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . D .
-End
Footnotes-
One has t o wonder--again i n commonplace terms--whether, i f t h e
Lincoln-Douglas debates had been s y s t e m a t i c a l l y i n t e r r u p t e d by a t h i r d person
w i t h a megaphone, o r i f e i t h e r speaker had claimed t h e r i g h t t o preempt
t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e a v a i l a b l e t i m e , anyone would have supposed t h e c o n s t a b l e t o be
powerless t o r e s t o r e o r d e r .
But we a r e n o t l i m i t e d t o h y p o t h e t i c a l s . The d i s t o r t i n g power o f money on
e l e c t i o n s has been known by t h e Supreme Court i t s e l f f o r a v e r y l o n g t i m e . I n Ex
p a r t e Yarbrough, n84 a v o t e r - i n t i m i d a t i o n case, J u s t i c e M i l l e r wrote f o r a
unanimous Court t h a t Congress must have t h e power t o make laws " f o r t h e f r e e ,
t h e pure, and t h e safe e x e r c i s e o f t h e r i g h t o f v o t i n g . " n85 And he warned about
t h e growing power o f money i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n : "The f r e e use o f money i n
e l e c t i o n s , a r i s i n g from t h e v a s t growth o f r e c e n t w e a l t h i n c e r t a i n q u a r t e r s ,
p r e s e n t s equal cause f o r a n x i e t y . I f t h e government o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s has
w i t h i n i t s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l domain no a u t h o r i t y t o p r o v i d e a g a i n s t these e v i l s . .
. then, indeed, i s t h e c o u n t r y i n danger . . . ." n86 The Yarbrough warning was
�§|~ LEXIS-NEXIS
4
- ^ ^ ^ A member of -the Reed Elsevier pit group
f k. p - ^ ci.-..;-,
LEXIS-NEXIS
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ A member of the Reed Rlscvicr pk group
-^ ^ A
^
1
1—
.
member of the D - . JElsevier pit group
Reed
�Page 20
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *113
n e i t h e r n o t i c e d n o r d e a l t w i t h by t h e p r e v a i l i n g o p i n i o n i n Buckley v. Valeo.
n87
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n84 110 U.S.
651
n85 Id. at
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(1884).
662.
n86 Id. at
-Footnotes-
667.
n87 424 U.S. 1 (1976). The Yarbrough warning was n o t i c e d i n , and f u r n i s h e d
the p o i n t o f d e p a r t u r e f o r , J u s t i c e White's d i s s e n t i n g o p i n i o n i n Buckley. I d .
a t 257 (White, J., c o n c u r r i n g i n p a r t and d i s s e n t i n g i n p a r t ) .
-End FootnotesC. P o l i t i c a l
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Intrusion
The Supreme Court i n Buckley d i d n o t s i m p l y r e j e c t Congress' handiwork; i t
r e w r o t e i t . I f a s t a t u t e i s judged t o be overbroad, and some o f i t s p r o v i s i o n s
are i n v a l i d a t e d on t h e i r face, what remains may n o t be a t a l l what t h e
l e g i s l a t o r s or
[*114]
even t h e l i t i g a n t s had i n mind. n88 By c o n t r a s t , when
an a c t i s d e c l a r e d u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i n a s p e c i f i c a p p l i c a t i o n , i t s framers a r e
l e f t f r e e t o r e d e s i g n i t t o g e t around t h e i d e n t i f i e d problem. A b s t r a c t o r
a d v i s o r y judgments do n o t a l l o w t h a t o p p o r t u n i t y , and leave i n t h e i r wake what
may verge on immutable l e g i s l a t i o n - - w i t h o u t t h e b e n e f i t o f committee h e a r i n g s t o
connect t h e law t o r e a l i t y .
- Footnotesn88 See i d . a t 108-09; i d . a t 255 (Burger, C.J., c o n c u r r i n g i n p a r t and
d i s s e n t i n g i n p a r t ) ; see g e n e r a l l y Note, supra note 55, a t 851.
-End FootnotesF e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r w r o t e a g a i n and a g a i n , as a law p r o f e s s o r and a l s o as a
J u s t i c e , t h a t t h e U.S. Supreme Court i s n o t a House o f Lords w i t h r e v i s o r y power
over l e g i s l a t i o n . n89 More p o i n t e d l y , he observed t h a t " t h e c o n t r o v e r s y between
l e g i s l a t u r e and c o u r t s , i n i s s u e s which m a t t e r most, i s n o t a t a l l a c o n t r o v e r s y
about l e g a l p r i n c i p l e s , b u t concerns t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f a d m i t t e d p r i n c i p l e s t o
c o m p l i c a t e d and o f t e n e l u s i v e f a c t s . " n90 Departure from t h i s d i s c i p l i n e o f
f a c t s can l a u n c h t h e Court i n t o a f r e e - f l o a t i n g c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h t h e p o l i t i c a l
branches o f government, i n which t h e Court i s w i t h o u t i t s l e g i t i m a t i n g excuse o f
law a p p l i c a t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l cases.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- -
n89 E.g., F r a n k f u r t e r , supra n o t e 1, a t 1003.
n90 I d . a t 1004.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
�) LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
r-H _ —. V.
t" « U ^ D
-I I? I _ _
•
1^
member ot rhe Rccd Elsevier pic group
n
n
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS' 6 ^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o f
t h c
R
«
d
Elsevier pic group
#i
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
"^S^A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o f
"
t h c
R
«
d
Elsevier pic group
�Page 21
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *114
There i s no p a r t i c u l a r reason f o r t h e Congress o r t h e P r e s i d e n t , o r f o r t h a t
m a t t e r t h e c o u n t r y , t o r e s p e c t such an i n t r u d e r . I n e a r l i e r cases, such as t h e
Dred S c o t t n91 d e c i s i o n , when t h e Court has reached o u t and decided a
c o n t r o v e r s i a l q u e s t i o n n o t p r o p e r l y b e f o r e i t , t h e p o l i t i c a l branches have f e l t
f r e e t o w i t h h o l d t h e i r acceptance. P r e s i d e n t L i n c o l n i n h i s F i r s t I n a u g u r a l
Address d e c l a r e d t h a t such d e t e r m i n a t i o n s cannot f o r e c l o s e t h e p u b l i c p o l i c y o f
t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , f o r o t h e r w i s e "the people w i l l have ceased t o be t h e i r own
r u l e r s , h a v i n g t o t h a t e x t e n t p r a c t i c a l l y r e s i g n e d t h e i r Government i n t o t h e
hands o f t h a t eminent t r i b u n a l . " n92
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n91 60
U.S.
(19
How.)
393
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(1857).
n92 6 James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers o f t h e P r e s i d e n t s 5, 9 (1897).
The people themselves today, when g i v e n an o p p o r t u n i t y , e v i n c e d i s d a i n f o r
B u c k l e v v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976). Gathered i n focus groups by competent
o p i n i o n t a k e r s , t h e y express d i s b e l i e f i n i t s r u l i n g and t h e n d i s m i s s a l . C e l i n d a
Lake, o f Greenberg-Lake A s s o c i a t e s , Remarks a t a F i r s t Amendment C o n s u l t a t i o n
convened by t h e a u t h o r o f t h i s A r t i c l e (Apr. 19, 1993) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*115]
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I t s h o u l d be t h e r o l e o f j u d i c i a l statesmanship
of r e a c t i o n .
t o avoid arousing that k i n d
D. R i g i d i t y o f Judgment
The Court, by making dubious a t - l a r g e pronouncements about c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
m a t t e r s , can t i e t h e r e m e d i a t i n g hands n o t o n l y o f t h e l e g i s l a t u r e b u t o f
i t s e l f . D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g one f a c t u a l circumstance from another i s what a l l o w s
some p l a y i n t h e a d j u d i c a t i v e j o i n t s and i n s o c i a l arrangements. I t i s much
harder t o e n t e r t a i n such v a r i a t i o n s when t h e i s s u e i s whether one i s b e i n g
f a i t h f u l t o some a p r i o r i d e c l a r a t i o n .
The modern Court has d i s c o v e r e d t h i s d i f f i c u l t y f o r i t s e l f i n another area
of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n t r o v e r s y . I n Planned Parenthood v. Casey, n93 t h e Court
w r e s t l e d w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n o f whether Roe v. Wade, n94 immunizing a b o r t i o n from
r e g u l a t i o n , s h o u l d be open t o r e e x a m i n a t i o n . n95 The g e n e r a l c l i m a t e o f o p i n i o n
concerning Roe, i n t h e c o u n t r y and i n Congress, c o u l d more a c c u r a t e l y be c a l l e d
an uproar t h a n a s e t t l e m e n t . Yet t h i s v e r y s t a t e o f beleaguerment was made a
b a s i s f o r r e f u s i n g r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . The l e g i t i m a c y o f t h e Court was seen, i n i t s
p l u r a l i t y o p i n i o n , n96 t o depend on p e r s i s t e n c e i n p o t e n t i a l e r r o r . The Court
must n o t " o v e r r u l e under f i r e " o r be p e r c e i v e d t o c u t and r u n i n t h e face o f
c o n t r o v e r s y . I t c o u l d l o c a t e no room f o r sober second t h o u g h t .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n93 505 U.S.
833
(1992).
n94 410 U.S.
113
(1973).
-Footnotes-
�I LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ A
m c m b c r o f the R c c d Elsevier pic group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
•^^ ^ A *
1
,.
member oc i - n R e e d c i
f thc — ' Elsevier pic group
f f f LEXIS-NEXIS'
^ ^ A
1
L
1.
member o f .the . R„ cJ CElsevier pic group
c d I....:
D
�Page 22
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 115
n95 Casey,
n96
505
U.S.
at
844.
I d . a t 866-67 ( o p i n i o n o f O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, J J . ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
This i s n o t a s a t i s f a c t o r y s t a t e o f a f f a i r s - - f o r t h e Court, t h e Congress, o r
the c o u n t r y . n97
- Footnotesn97 I t s h o u l d be unnecessary t o add t h a t one's view on t h i s p o i n t has n o t h i n g
n e c e s s a r i l y t o do w i t h t h e u l t i m a t e m e r i t s o f t h e a b o r t i o n - r i g h t s c o n t r o v e r s y .
-End
III.
Footnotes-
Correctives
A. Voiding Valeo
I n t h e F i r s t Restatement o f Judgments, p u b l i s h e d i n 1942, t h e American Law
I n s t i t u t e decreed t h a t a judgment rendered w i t h o u t s u b j e c t - m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n
i s v o i d . n98 That would mean,
[*116]
i f taken l i t e r a l l y , t h a t an a d v i s o r y
o p i n i o n l i k e t h a t i n Buckley v. Valeo would be w i t h o u t f o r c e o r e f f e c t , even as
between t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e l a w s u i t ; i t c o u l d be a n n u l l e d c o l l a t e r a l l y o r i g n o r e d
i n l a t e r proceedings r a i s i n g t h e same q u e s t i o n s . I n p r a c t i c e t h i s t u r n e d o u t t o
be t o o sweeping an i n v a l i d a t i o n , and had t o be m o d i f i e d so c o n s i d e r a b l y t h a t a
new f o r m u l a t i o n was drawn up i n 1982. n99
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - -
n98 Restatement o f Judgments s e c t i o n 7 (1942).
n99 Restatement (Second) o f Judgments s e c t i o n 11 (1982).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - -
As now phrased, t h e r u l e reads t h a t "a judgment may p r o p e r l y be rendered . .
. o n l y i f t h e c o u r t has a u t h o r i t y t o a d j u d i c a t e t h e type o f c o n t r o v e r s y i n v o l v e d
i n t h e a c t i o n . " The f i r s t example g i v e n o f a u t h o r i t y l i m i t a t i o n i s A r t i c l e I I I
of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , which " d e f i n e s t h e k i n d s o f proceedings t h a t Congress may
a u t h o r i z e [ t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t s ] t o e n t e r t a i n . " nlOO These l i m i t s may be invoked
by t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e proceeding, and by t h e c o u r t , b u t n o t o r d i n a r i l y a f t e r t h e
judgment i s f i n a l . n l O l I n most i n s t a n c e s , t h e i n t e r e s t i n f i n a l i t y o f
l i t i g a t i o n s h o u l d o v e r - r i d e t h e i n t e r e s t i n c u r b i n g excesses o f j u d i c i a l power.
nl02
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nlOO I d . a t cmt. a.
n l O l I d . a t cmts. c , d.
-Footnotes-
�fl)
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A member of rhe Reed Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS
•^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A member of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 23
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *116
n l 0 2 I d . s e c t i o n 12 cmt. a., s e c t i o n 69 cmt. c.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes- -
But not always. I f the e r r o r i s p l a i n , the Restatement, even today, would
allow annulment. nl03 And i f "plainness" can be thought to import an element of
s i g n i f i c a n c e , the j u d i c i a l overreaching i n Buckley v. Valeo could perhaps
q u a l i f y . As Professor F r a n k f u r t e r wrote i n h i s annual assessments of the work of
the Supreme Court: " I n a l l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l cases, . . . j u r i s d i c t i o n a l
l i m i t a t i o n s assume p e c u l i a r importance, i n t e n s i f i e d where the Court's
a d j u d i c a t i o n r e s o l v e s what i s i n e f f e c t a controversy between i t s e l f and the
Congress . . . ." nl04 That i s a good d e s c r i p t i o n of the stakes a t play i n
Buckley.
- _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - _ _
n l 0 3 I d . s e c t i o n s 1 2 ( 1 ) , 69.
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl04 Felix Frankfurter & Henry M. Hart, Jr., The Business of the Supreme
Court at October Term, 1934, 49 Harv. L. Rev. 68, 93-94
(1935).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B. D i s r e g a r d i n g F a c t l e s s D e c i s i o n s
But we need n o t debate t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o Buckley o f t h e e x c e p t i o n s i n t h e
Restatement. For t h e i s s u e i s n o t r e s j u d i c a t a as between t h e p a r t i e s , i t i s
s t a r e d e c i s i s f o r t h e Court and f u t u r e l i t i g a n t s . And here t h e t r a d i t i o n s
strongly favor revising
[*117]
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l d e c i s i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y those
based on d o u b t f u l f a c t u a l assumptions, s i n c e t h e y a r e o t h e r w i s e u n c o r r e c t a b l e
save by amendment t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n .
Chief J u s t i c e Taney and J u s t i c e Brandeis expressed i n t h e i r times what i s
s t i l l regarded as t h e h i s t o r i c a l l y v a l i d view on t h i s p o i n t . The C h i e f J u s t i c e
wrote:
I . . . am q u i t e w i l l i n g t h a t i t be regarded h e r e a f t e r as t h e law o f t h i s
c o u r t , t h a t i t s o p i n i o n upon t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n i s always open
t o d i s c u s s i o n when i t i s supposed t o have been founded i n e r r o r , and t h a t i t s
j u d i c i a l a u t h o r i t y s h o u l d h e r e a f t e r depend a l t o g e t h e r on t h e f o r c e o f t h e
r e a s o n i n g by which i t i s supported. n l 0 5
-Footnotesn l 0 5 Smith v . Turner, 48 U.S.
dissenting).
(7 How.) 283,
-End
470
(1849)
(Taney, C.J.,
Footnotes-
L i k e w i s e J u s t i c e Brandeis: " I n cases i n v o l v i n g t h e F e d e r a l C o n s t i t u t i o n ,
where c o r r e c t i o n t h r o u g h l e g i s l a t i v e a c t i o n i s p r a c t i c a l l y i m p o s s i b l e , t h i s
c o u r t has o f t e n o v e r r u l e d i t s e a r l i e r d e c i s i o n s . The c o u r t bows t o t h e lessons
of experience and t h e f o r c e o f b e t t e r r e a s o n i n g . . . ." nl06
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�-
f|~ LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^
1 Z > A * member of rhe Reed c i . „ . „ „i. group
u..
Elsevier pk
;
f l J LEXIS-NEXIS- ^ ^ A member of the Reed Klsevier pk group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS'
1
-^ ^ ^ A member of ihe Reed Elsevier pic group
^
�Page 24
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 117
nl06 Burnet v. Coronado O i l & Gas Co.,
J., d i s s e n t i n g ) ( f o o t n o t e o m i t t e d ) .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
285 U.S.
-End Footnotes-
393,
406-08 (1932)
(Brandeis,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C. P r e s e n t i n g New Facts
The lessons o f e x p e r i e n c e , o f course, a r e b e s t s u b m i t t e d t o a c o u r t as
a d j u d i c a t i v e o r l e g i s l a t i v e f a c t s b e a r i n g on t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s s u e s t o be
decided. Even t h e p l u r a l i t y i n Planned Parenthood v. Casey n l 0 7 a l l o w e d t h a t
s t a r e d e c i s i s c o u l d y i e l d t o such a d e m o n s t r a t i o n : When t h e f a c t s apparent t o
the Court a r e " c l e a r l y a t odds" w i t h t h e premise o f an e a r l y d e c i s i o n , t h e n i t s
r e e x a m i n a t i o n i s "not o n l y j u s t i f i e d b u t r e q u i r e d . " n l 0 8 There i s a t hand f o r
t h i s purpose a s u b s t a n t i a l a r r a y o f p e r t i n e n t f a c t s , e i t h e r a l r e a d y on r e c o r d o r
ready t o be made so.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl07 505 U.S.
nl08 Id. at
833
(1992)
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(opinion of O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, JJ.).
863.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To b e g i n w i t h , t h e Buckley Court has been o v e r r u l e d by experience i n i t s
a s s e r t i o n t h a t " v i r t u a l l y a l l m e a n i n g f u l p o l i t i c a l communications i n t h e modern
s e t t i n g involve the expenditure
[*118]
o f money." n l 0 9 I n t h e 1992
p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign, i t was t h e f r e e p o l i t i c a l media t h a t dominated. Many o f
t h e c a n d i d a t e s ' most t e l l i n g appearances were made on t a l k shows, i n t e r v i e w
programs, and t e l e v i s e d debates. n l l O A l l o f these appearances were f r e e o f
charge and a l l o f f e r e d more media exposure--of t h e c a n d i d a t e , and o f h i s
themes--than e i t h e r news programs o r p a i d a d v e r t i s e m e n t s . As Ross Perot p u t i t
when he i n i t i a l l y t u r n e d down h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l a d v i s e r s ' p r o p o s a l f o r an
expensive ad campaign, "'Why pay good money f o r something you can g e t f o r
free?'" n l l l
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl09 Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
11.
n l l O See R i c h a r d Harwood, The Growing I r r e l e v a n c e o f J o u r n a l i s t s , Wash. Post,
Oct. 23, 1992, a t A21; E l i z a b e t h K o l b e r t , W h i s t l e Stops a l a 1992: A r s e n i c ,
L a r r y and P h i l , N.Y. Times, June 5, 1992, a t A18; F i n a l Debate Tops R a t i n g , N.Y.
Times, Oct. 2 1 , 1992, a t A19.
n l l l John M i n t z & David Von D r e h l e , Why Perot Walked Away, Wash. Post, J u l y
19, 1992, a t A l , A18; see a l s o i n f r a apps. A.2.XIII-XV, B.2.C.1-8.
-End
Footnotes-
The Supreme Court i n Buckley a l s o m a i n t a i n e d t h a t p e r s o n a l w e a l t h does n o t
i n c u b a t e c o r r u p t i o n and i s t h e r e f o r e n o t a cause f o r concern i n p o l i t i c a l
campaigns. n l l 2 There a r e , however, o t h e r causes f o r concern: t h e p u l l t h a t
�i|)
LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ A
mcmbcr of thc R c c d Elsevier p k group
fp
LEXIS-NEXIS'
1
c the — J Elsevier p1. group
- ^ ^ ^ A* member of ^ - o Reed c i
k
%t
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ A*
1... of u . Reed Elsevier pic group
mcmbcr _ . - .the » J n
�Page 25
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *118
l i m i t l e s s resources can e x e r t on b o t h campaigning and t h e conduct o f o f f i c e byless wealthy r i v a l s . n l l 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nll2 Buckley,
424 U.S. at
-Footnotes- -
53.
n l l 3 See i n f r a apps. A.2.XVI, B . I I . B . 8 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
As f o r t h e Court's f i n d i n g t h a t "independent" campaign ads are i n e f f e c t i v e
because t h e y are n o t c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h t h e c a n d i d a t e , n l l 4 t h i s i s b e l i e d by t h e
W i l l i e Horton ads o f 1988, which s t u d i e s show t o have been h i g h l y e f f e c t i v e and
perhaps r e s p o n s i b l e f o r George Bush g a i n i n g t h e p r e s i d e n c y . The most c a r e f u l
s t u d y o f t h e campaign shows t h a t Bush i n a u g u r a t e d t h e use o f t h e W i l l i e H o r t o n
s t o r y i n h i s June 1988 campaign speeches. n l l 5 I n September, t h e "independent"
N a t i o n a l S e c u r i t y P o l i t i c a l A c t i o n Committee (NSPAC) t e l e v i s i o n ad made i t s
appearance, f o l l o w e d i n October by t h e Bush campaign's own " r e v o l v i n g door"
a d v e r t i s e m e n t . Bush f o r m a l l y r e p u d i a t e d t h e NSPAC ads, by t h e n i d e n t i f i e d as
r a c i s t ; b u t a new s e t o f these ads was shown i n t h e f i n a l two weeks o f the
campaign. Bush h i m s e l f c o n t i n u e d t o t a l k about W i l l i e Horton, g e n e r a t i n g press
photos
[*119]
and coverage, t h r o u g h o u t t h i s p e r i o d . He d i d so w i t h o u t
m e n t i o n i n g Horton's race, which was w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e n i n t h e NSPAC ads.
-Footnotesnll4 Buckley,
n l l 5 Jamieson,
424 U.S. at
45.
supra n o t e 67, a t 16-27.
-End Footnotes-
Thus t h e Bush campaign b o t h spawned and p r o f i t e d
independent ad.
from a p r o f e s s e d l y
That i s t h e way t h i n g s happen i n the r e a l p o l i t i c a l w o r l d . I n 1980, a s l a t e
of s e n i o r Republican s t r a t e g i s t s o r g a n i z e d an "independent" committee f o r Ronald
Reagan w i t h t h e avowed o b j e c t i v e o f r a i s i n g and spending up t o $ 50 m i l l i o n f o r
the Reagan campaign. n l l 6 A t the Republican Convention t h a t year, committee
member Senator Jesse Helms conceded t h a t i t was d i f f i c u l t sometimes t o keep up
the appearances o f detachment: " I ' v e had t o , s o r t o f , t a l k i n d i r e c t l y w i t h
[Reagan campaign chairman] Paul L a x a l t and hope t h a t he would pass a l o n g , uh,
and I t h i n k t h e messages have g o t t e n t h r o u g h a l l r i g h t . " n l l 7 The committee and
the campaign c o u l d keep a b r e a s t o f each o t h e r , as business c o l l a b o r a t o r s do,
t h r o u g h p a r a l l e l p u b l i c s t a t e m e n t s . And the committee p o r t r a y e d i t s e l f t o
c o n t r i b u t o r s as h a v i n g i n f l u e n c e w i t h t h e c a n d i d a t e .
- Footnotesn l l 6 Anne V. Simonett, The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f R e g u l a t i n g Independent
E x p e n d i t u r e Committees i n P u b l i c l y Funded P r e s i d e n t i a l Campaigns, 18 Harv. J. on
L e g i s . 679, 685-87 (1981) .
�I P LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
| p LEXIS-NEXIS"
'6i^
A
member of ihe Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 26
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 119
n i l ? I n t e r v i e w o f Senator Jesse Helms by Sander Vanocur (ABC News t e l e v i s i o n
b r o a d c a s t , J u l y 16, 1980), quoted i n B r i e f f o r P e t i t i o n e r a t 30, Carter-Mondale
R e e l e c t i o n Comm. v. FEC, Nos. 80-1841, 80-1842 (D.C. C i r . Sept. 12, 1980),
quoted i n Simonett, supra note 148, a t 687 n. 42.
-End
Footnotes-
The Court has a l s o been shown t o be i n e r r o r i n i t s p r e d i c t i o n t h a t
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s would be unnecessary t o m a i n t a i n t h e i n t e g r i t y o f
c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s . n l l 8 I n fact, the a v a i l a b i l i t y of u n l i m i t e d expenditures
has brought heavy p r e s s u r e t o bear on t h e campaign f i n a n c i n g system l e f t i n
p l a c e by t h e Court, w i t h huge " s o f t money" and o t h e r evasions o f t h e
c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s . n l l 9 I n t h e eyes o f v e t e r a n observer H e r b e r t Alexander,
these have d e s t r o y e d t h e p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g scheme t h a t t h e Court approved. n l 2 0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nll8 Buckley,
424 U.S. at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
55-56.
n l l 9 See Raskin & B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 328-29; i n f r a , p a r t I I I . C . and
app. B.II.B.7-9.
n l 2 0 ABA S p e c i a l Comm. on E l e c t i o n Reform, Campaign F i n a n c i n g a f t e r
v. Valeo 2-4 (1976).
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[*120]
-End Footnotes-
Bucklev
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
So, t h e f a c t s have changed o r become c l e a r e r w i t h t i m e , thus e s t a b l i s h i n g
one b a s i s f o r o v e r r u l i n g o r l i m i t i n g Buckley v. Valeo. A f u r t h e r b a s i s f o r d o i n g
so i s t h e broadening o f r a t i o n a l e s f o r c u r b i n g campaign e x p e n d i t u r e .
D. Broadening
the Rationale
The Court i n Buckley and r e l a t e d d e c i s i o n s found o n l y one m o t i v a t i n g impulse
f o r c o n g r e s s i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n o f campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s : " P r e v e n t i n g c o r r u p t i o n o r
the appearance o f c o r r u p t i o n a r e t h e o n l y l e g i t i m a t e and c o m p e l l i n g government
i n t e r e s t s t h u s f a r i d e n t i f i e d f o r r e s t r i c t i n g campaign f i n a n c e s . " n l 2 l I t was
because a c a n d i d a t e ' s e x p e n d i t u r e s from h i s own pocket o r h i s own campaign
t r e a s u r y , a l o n g w i t h u n c o o r d i n a t e d e x p e n d i t u r e s by o t h e r s , c o u l d n o t be
c l a s s i f i e d as q u i d p r o quo t r a n s a c t i o n s , t h a t t h e Buckley Court h e l d them t o be
nonregulatable. nl22
-Footnotesnl21 FEC v. JVational Conservative Political Action
496-97
(1985).
nl22 Buckley,
424 U.S. at 26-27,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
45,
Comm.,
470 U.S.
480,
53.
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
But t h a t i s n o t t h e o n l y o r even n e c e s s a r i l y t h e s t r o n g e s t r a t i o n a l e f o r
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ J ^ A member of the Reed ^ " pk group
*
- ~ Elsevier
D
<
# i LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
g § LEXIS-NEXIS"
^
1
_ ^ Elsevier pit
A member of the Reed n,__ :__ _. group
L
�Page 27
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 120
c u r b i n g campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s . Others can be i d e n t i f i e d and c o u l d be p r o c l a i m e d
by l e g i s l a t i o n as t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r a f r e s h e f f o r t a t campaign f i n a n c e r e f o r m .
To b e g i n w i t h , a l i m i t a t i o n on campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s may be s a i d t o improve
the conduct o f p u b l i c business by o f f i c e h o l d e r s , i n two senses. F i r s t an
incumbent who c o n s t a n t l y needs t o r a i s e money f o r t h e n e x t campaign i s not f r e e
t o address h i m s e l f t o t h e t a s k s f o r which he o r she was e l e c t e d , namely,
l e g i s l a t i n g and o v e r s e e i n g t h e e x e c u t i v e . n l 2 3 As one s t a t e l e g i s l a t o r has
commented: " ' I ' v e been s i t t i n g here f o r two hours t h i s morning t r y i n g h a r d t o
l i s t e n t o t e s t i m o n y . But a l l I ended up d o i n g was making l i s t s o f people who
might p u t down $ 1,000 f o r a t a b l e a t my next f u n d - r a i s e r . ' " n l 2 4
- Footnotesnl2 3 See Campaign Finance Reform: Hearings on S.J. Res. 21, S.J. Res. 13 0,
and S.J. Res. 166 Before t h e Subcomm. on the C o n s t i t u t i o n of t h e Senate
J u d i c i a r y Comm., 100th Cong., 2d Sess. 15 (1988) ( t e s t i m o n y of Senator Ernest F.
Hollings).
nl24 C a l i f o r n i a Comm'n on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , The New Gold Rush: F i n a n c i n g
C a l i f o r n i a ' s L e g i s l a t i v e Campaigns, Summary Report 10 (1985).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*121]
-End
Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
T h i s i s d e f e n s i v e f u n d - r a i s i n g , and i t i n t e r f e r e s w i t h p u b l i c business
w i t h o u t r e g a r d t o the source o f t h e apprehended a s s a u l t . The money t h a t provokes
concern c o u l d come e q u a l l y from a w e a l t h y c h a l l e n g e r , an "independent"
committee, o r o r d i n a r y campaign funds. So l o n g as i t i s u n l i m i t e d , i t p l a y s
u n l i m i t e d hob w i t h an o f f i c e h o l d e r ' s a t t e n t i o n t o business.
The same t h i n g i s t r u e o f the p r i n c i p a l use t o which l i m i t l e s s c h a l l e n g e r
e x p e n d i t u r e s t e n d t o be p u t : t h e p r o d u c t i o n and r e p e a t e d d i s p l a y of 30-second
a t t a c k ads on t e l e v i s i o n . These " k i l l e r ads" are n o t e w o r t h y f o r d i s t o r t i n g more
than t h e y r e v e a l , and f o r d w e l l i n g on s u p e r f i c i a l i t i e s more t h a n on genuine
i s s u e s . n l 2 5 T h e i r p r o s p e c t i v e use has a well-documented, s e r i o u s l y c o n s t r i c t i n g
e f f e c t on debate and d i s p o s i t i o n o f the p u b l i c business, on c o n t r o v e r s i a l
s u b j e c t s l i k e t h e growth o f f e d e r a l e n t i t l e m e n t s , because t h e incumbent has t o
worry l e s s about what i s r i g h t and more about how h i s p o s i t i o n may be
r e p r e s e n t e d i n a 30-second TV a s s a u l t . nl26
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl25 See Jamieson, supra note 67, a t 15-23.
nl26 See Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t : Hearings on S. 743, S. 744, and S. 1009
Before t h e Subcomm. on Communications o f t h e Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science
and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 100th Cong., 1st Sess. 68 (1989) [ h e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on
Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t ] (statement o f C u r t i s B. Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r
the Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End
Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thus, t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t a regime o f l i m i t l e s s e x p e n d i t u r e s tends t o open up
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
•^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXISk
f
1
^ ^ ^ ^ A member of the O"'' ^'^
^
*
Reed F.lscvier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS"
1
1
;
1
^ ^ ^ ^ * member * thc Reed F.lsevicf pk group
•
A
of
�Page 28
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 121
a p o t e n t i a l f o r l i m i t l e s s a t t a c k s against incumbent o f f i c e holders, the p u b l i c
business s u f f e r s . This r a t i o n a l e f o r curbing expenditures i s unaffected by
anything decided i n Buckley v. Valeo.
So i s t h e o t h e r major r a t i o n a l e n o t c o n s i d e r e d i n Buckley, which i s t h a t
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s may a c t u a l l y improve speech--in t h e r o o t sense o f d i s c o u r s e ,
as opposed t o noise--more t h a n t h e y d e t r a c t from i t . n l 2 7 R e g u l a t i o n s l i m i t i n g
campaign spending would encourage a movement away from s t u d i o appearances and
toward p u b l i c canvassing, which i s b o t h l e s s expensive and more p a r t i c i p a t o r y ,
hence more p r o d u c t i v e o f F i r s t Amendment speech and a s s o c i a t i o n . n l 2 8 T h i s
movement would t e n d t o overcome t h e d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t s o f
[*122]
the
p r e s e n t widespread r e l i a n c e on campaign TV, which has meant t h a t r e l a t i v e l y
l i t t l e i s spent by most c a n d i d a t e s on campaign a c t i v i t i e s engaging t h e
c i t i z e n r y . As C u r t i s Gans d e s c r i b e s t h e c u r r e n t scene, "we have developed t h e
p o l i t i c a l e q u i v a l e n t o f t h e S i l e n t S p r i n g i n American p o l i t i c s , i n which t h e r e
are no l o n g e r b u t t o n s and bumper s t i c k e r s , phone banks and f i e l d o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,
v o l u n t e e r s and p a r t i c i p a n t s . We m a n i p u l a t e our c i t i z e n s , we do n o t i n v o l v e
them." n l 2 9
- Footnotesnl27 See, e.g., Marlene A. Nicholson, Political Campaign Expenditure
Limitations and the Unconstitutional Condition Doctrine, 10 Hastings
Const.
601,
631-32
nl28 See Developments in the Law: Elections, 88 Harv.
(1975)
L.Q.
(1983).
L. Rev.
llll,
1238
.
n l 2 9 Hearings on Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g Act, supra note 126, a t 67.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
R e l i a n c e on t e l e v i s i o n , an expensive medium, has had a p a r t i c u l a r tendency
t o debase t h e c u r r e n c y o f p o l i t i c a l speech. I t t o o e a s i l y t r u n c a t e s and
t r i v i a l i z e s t h e messages i t d e l i v e r s , condensing f o r example a complex c h a i n o f
r e a s o n i n g i n t o an e m o t i o n a l l y charged ten-second "sound b i t e . " I t focuses i t s
l e n s on s u r f a c e t r a i t s o f p e r s o n a l i t y and appearance, t o t h e d e t r i m e n t o f
c h a r a c t e r and competence assessments, which i s what t h e v o t e r s need t o make an
i n f o r m e d s e l e c t i o n . And access t o t e l e v i s i o n , a l o n g w i t h money, i s what has
l i b e r a t e d o f f i c e seekers from t h e r e s p o n s i b l e t u t e l a g e o f p a r t y o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,
w i t h a l l t h a t i m p l i e s f o r t h e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f a government h e t e r o g e n e o u s l y
i n s t a l l e d . nl30
-Footnotesn l 3 0 See K a t h l e e n H. Jamieson & K a r l y n K. Campbell, The I n t e r p l a y o f
I n f l u e n c e : News, A d v e r t i s i n g , P o l i t i c s , and t h e Mass Media 282-83 (3d. ed.
1992).
-End
Footnotes-
Beyond t h a t , l i m i t l e s s money i n p o l i t i c a l campaigns--whether spent on
t e l e v i s i o n o r f o r o t h e r purposes--tends t o show up i n s c u r r i l o u s o r d e c e p t i v e
speech and p r a c t i c e s . n l 3 1 T h i s i s a t e m p t a t i o n f o r a l l campaigns t h a t a r e
�I j i LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS'
k
I
_i
D
J Cl
• . _l .
- *^ J ^ A member of" the Reed Elsevier pic group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
I
I
:
• ^ ^ A1 member —I .ihe D
ol l . _ Reed C l
Elsevier _ l . group
pic
�Page 29
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 122
f i n a n c e d t o a s u r f e i t , not j u s t f o r t h e 1972 Nixon Committee and i t s Watergate
appendage. n l 3 2 J u s t as a nuclear-weapons s u r f e i t w i l l l e a d a n t a g o n i s t s t o
engage i n d e s t a b i l i z i n g f i r s t - s t r i k e d i s p o s i t i o n s , so an e x c e s s i v e l y f i n a n c e d
p o l i t i c a l campaign w i l l s t a r t s u r m i s i n g what a s i m i l a r l y f i n a n c e d opponent c o u l d
do and maneuver t o p e r f o r m t h a t stratagem f i r s t i t s e l f . A l e a n e r f i n a n c i a l d i e t
would make f o r c l e a n e r and more coherent e l e c t i o n s .
- Footnotesn l 3 1 Campaign Finance Reform: Hearings Before t h e Task Force on Campaign
Finance Reform of t h e House Comm. on Admin., I 0 2 d Cong., 1st Sess. 46 (1991)
[ h e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform] ( t e s t i m o n y and statement o f
C u r t i s B. Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r t h e Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
n l 3 2 Developments i n t h e Law:
Elections,
supra note 128, a t 1236.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*123]
Again, and f i n a l l y , t h e d r a i n on t h e candidate's t i m e f o r f u n d r a i s i n g ,
whether he o r she i s an incumbent o r a c h a l l e n g e r , i s enormous under t h e p r e s e n t
system. I t c u t s h e a v i l y i n t o h i s o r her campaign t i m e and d i m i n i s h e s t h e q u a l i t y
b o t h of t h o u g h t and o f e x p r e s s i o n t h a t should be a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e e l e c t i o n
process. There can be no v o t e r s ' mandate i f t h e r e i s no menu t o choose from, and
the freedom t o compose menus i s compromised by f u n d - r a i s i n g n e c e s s i t i e s . A l e s s
expensive campaign w i t h a s m a l l e r purse would a l l o w a l l c a n d i d a t e s t o do a
b e t t e r j o b o f d e v e l o p i n g t h e i r aims and i n t e n t i o n s i n seeking p u b l i c o f f i c e .
nl33
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl33 C a l i f o r n i a Comm'n on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , supra note 124, a t 11.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End
Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
So, a c o n s i d e r e d l i m i t a t i o n on campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s would serve
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l purposes by enhancing t h e q u a l i t y o f d i s c o u r s e between c a n d i d a t e
and v o t e r . Congress o r a s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e c o u l d choose t o make t h a t o b j e c t i v e
c l e a r by d e c l a r i n g , among t h e o b j e c t i v e s o f a new r e f o r m e f f o r t , t h a t i t wished
" ' t o f a c i l i t a t e f u l l and f r e e d i s c u s s i o n and debate,'" o r words t o t h a t e f f e c t .
n l 3 4 Since t h e s t a t u t e would be i n t e n d e d t o serve F i r s t Amendment purposes, and
would be c a l c u l a t e d t o do so, no c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amendment would be r e q u i r e d .
nl35
- Footnotesn l 3 4 Jonathan Bingham, Democracy o r P l u t o c r a c y ? : The Case f o r a
C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Amendment t o O v e r t u r n Buckley v. Valeo, Annals Am. Acad. P o l . &
Soc. S c i . , J u l y 1986, a t 103, 113.
nl35 The U.S. Senate i n May 1993 adopted a "sense o f t h e Senate" r e s o l u t i o n
c a l l i n g f o r t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l o v e r t u r n of Buckley v. Valeo. S. Res. 380, 103d
Cong., 1 s t Sess., 139 Cong. Rec. 6623 (1993). I t s 52-43 v o t e f e l l s h o r t o f t h e
t w o - t h i r d s m a j o r i t y needed t o i n i t i a t e an amendment t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . See i d .
�I LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
#^
LEXIS-NEXIS
'6<^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o {
t h c
R c c d
EUevicr pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS
' ^ ^
A
member of the Reed Elsevier pit group
�Page 30
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *123
at
6640.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End F o o t n o t e s -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IV. Remedial Process
A. L e g i s l a t i v e
Challenge
V a r i o u s s t a t e s a r e now, i n f a c t , c o n s i d e r i n g c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n . A s t a t u t o r y
c h a l l e n g e t o Buckley v. Valeo has been approved by t h e Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e
C o u n c i l , n l 3 6 w i t h t h e support o f t h a t s t a t e ' s a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l . n l 3 7 B a l l o t
i n i t i a t i v e s t o the
[*124]
same e f f e c t a r e b e i n g r e a d i e d i n o t h e r s t a t e s , l e d
by Oregon. n l 3 8 The p e r t i n e n t committees o f t h e U.S. Congress a r e p r e p a r e d t o
take s e r i o u s l y such p r o p o s a l s , i f and when t h e y a r e adopted by t h e n a t i o n a l
l e a d e r s h i p . n l 3 9 A l l t h i s i s i n keeping w i t h t h e recommendations o f t h e
C a l i f o r n i a Commission on Campaign Finance, a n o n p a r t i s a n s t u d y group. A f t e r
e i g h t years o f s e a r c h i n g e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e problem i n our l a r g e s t s t a t e , t h a t
commission concluded t h a t :
- Footnotes-
n l 3 6 See g e n e r a l l y
Elections,
Hornet).
E l e c t i o n Reform Hearings Before t h e Wis. Assembly Comm. on
C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Law, and C o r r e c t i o n s (1994)
( t e s t i m o n y o f Roland
n l 3 7 Memorandum o f Meeting w i t h James Doyle, Wis. A t t o r n e y Gen. ( J u l y 12,
1993) (on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
n l 3 8 Memorandum f o r t h e Record by Roland Hornet (June 22, 1993) and ensuing
correspondence, "Oregon Campaign Finance Reform D i s c u s s i o n s , " (on f i l e w i t h
author).
n l 3 9 Memoranda o f c o n v e r s a t i o n s w i t h t h e S t a f f D i r e c t o r s o f t h e Senate Rules
Comm. and t h e House E l e c t i o n s Subcomm. (1992-94) (on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
-End
Footnotes-
the e f f e c t s o f huge c o n t r i b u t i o n s and h i g h one-sided spending . . . a r e
d e s t a b i l i z i n g and i n h e r e n t l y c o r r u p t i v e o f t h e democratic process. A l t h o u g h
c u r r e n t Supreme Court r u l i n g s make i t d i f f i c u l t . . . t o make any c o n c r e t e
recommendations i n t h i s area, t h e Commission . . . b e l i e v e s i t s t r o n g l y
d e s i r a b l e t o p r e s e n t t h e Court w i t h c a r e f u l l y researched data and arguments so
t h a t i t can c o n s i d e r u p h o l d i n g r e s p o n s i b l e l i m i t a t i o n s . . . . n l 4 0
-Footnotesn l 4 0 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign Finance, Democracy by I n i t i a t i v e :
C a l i f o r n i a ' s F o u r t h Branch o f Government 28 (1992).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
That i s , o f course, what a s t a t u t o r y c h a l l e n g e would
accomplish.
Shaping
�) LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
member of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
^0
LEXIS-NEXIS'
" 6 L
A
m < : m b c r
o t
l h c
R c c d
E'sevier pic group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
"6<
A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 31
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 124
There a r e o t h e r p o s s i b l e approaches t o t h e displacement o f Bucklev v.
Valeo. One t h a t has g a i n e d a t t e n t i o n i s t o b r i n g s u i t t o i n v a l i d a t e t h e p r e s e n t ,
p o s t - B u c k l e y p a t t e r n o f l e g i s l a t i o n . The t h e o r y o f such an a c t i o n would be t h a t
a regime o f u n l i m i t e d campaign spending, w i t h i t s i n g r a i n e d f a v o r i t i s m f o r
wealthy p a r t i c i p a n t s , e n t a i l s a systematic denial of the c i t i z e n s ' r i g h t t o cast
an equal v o t e . Equal P r o t e c t i o n d o c t r i n e and cases a p p l y i n g t h e V o t i n g R i g h t s
Act o f 1965 n l 4 1 would be c i t e d as e s t a b l i s h i n g t h a t r i g h t . n l 4 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl41
42 U . S . C .
section
1973
-Footnotes- - -
(1988).
n l 4 2 Raskin & B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 320-24.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes- -
Conceding t h e p o l i t i c a l j u s t i c e o f such an argument, t h e r e a r e o b s t a c l e s i n
t h e way o f i t s j u d i c i a l v i n d i c a t i o n . One i s t h a t , as a c i t i z e n s ' s u i t , t h e
l i t i g a t i o n c o u l d r a i s e t h e same o r even
[*125]
tougher problems o f s t a n d i n g
and j u s t i c i a b i l i t y t h a n those mishandled by t h e Supreme Court i n Buckley v.
Valeo. n l 4 3 Another, more t a c t i c a l d i f f i c u l t y i s t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f s i n such
proceedings would be a s k i n g t h e Supreme Court t o h o l d u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l t h e v e r y
s t a t u t e t h a t i t i n e f f e c t c r e a t e d , when i t decided what would s u r v i v e i n t h e
1974 s t a t u t e and what would n o t . I t i s always h a r d e r , o r s h o u l d be, t o argue
a g a i n s t c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y t h a n i n f a v o r - - a n d here, a p r i d e o f j u d i c i a l
a u t h o r s h i p c o u l d make i t p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t .
- Footnotesn l 4 3 The proponents o f t h i s approach a c c o r d i n g l y f a v o r a " s a l a m i - s l i c e "
s e r i e s o f s u i t s , c h a l l e n g i n g successive p a r t s o f t h e p r e s e n t campaign-finance
system w i t h a view t o changing j u d i c i a l p e r s p e c t i v e s over t i m e . Raskin &
B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 331.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The r i s k o f an i l l - f o u n d e d s u i t i s o f course t h a t i t c o u l d p r e c i p i t a t e an
e a r l y , and damaging, l o s s . G e t t i n g a l e g i s l a t u r e on t h e s i d e o f t h e
complainants, b e f o r e j o i n i n g s u i t , might t a k e more t i m e , b u t i t s h o u l d g r e a t l y
s t r e n g t h e n t h e chances o f p r e v a i l i n g . For l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and
d e c l a r a t i o n s o f purpose, when r e a s o n a b l y supported, a r e e n t i t l e d t o j u d i c i a l
r e s p e c t f o r t h e purpose o f reexamining c o n s t i t u t i o n a l d e c i s i o n s . n l 4 4
- Footnotesnl44 Glidden
Co.
v.
Zdanok,
370
U.S.
530,
541-43
(1962)
(Harlan,
plurality opinion). This view was adopted by majorities in Texas
410 U.S.
381-82
702,
711
(1969).
(1973)
and Red Lion Broadcasting
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
Co.
v.
FCC,
J.;
v.
395
Louisiana,
U.S.
367,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I n t h e campaign f i n a n c e arena i n p a r t i c u l a r , l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s have been
�fp
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd F.lscvier pk group
m
LEXIS-NEXIS'
LEXIS-NEXIS'
• ^ ^ ^ A member of thc Rccd Elievier pk group
-^^A
mcmbcr of ihe Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 32
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 125
r e c o g n i z e d as c a r r y i n g p e r s u a s i v e w e i g h t . I n F i r s t N a t i o n a l Bank v. B e l l o t t i ,
n l 4 5 where t h e argument was pressed t h a t c o r p o r a t e f i n a n c i a l involvement can
d i s t o r t e l e c t i o n s , t h e Court n o t e d t h a t t h e r e were no " r e c o r d o r l e g i s l a t i v e
f i n d i n g s " t o s u p p o r t t h a t argument; had t h e r e been some, t h e Court s a i d , t h e y
would have m e r i t e d c o n s i d e r a t i o n . n l 4 6 Four years l a t e r , i n FEC v. N a t i o n a l
R i g h t t o Work Committee, t h e Court e x p l i c i t l y accepted l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s on
matters of p o l i t i c a l f a c t . nl47
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl45
435
U.S.
765
(1978).
nl46 Bellotti, 435 U.S.
n l 4 7 459 U . S .
197,
-Footnotes- -
at
209-10
788-89.
(1982).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End F o o t n o t e s -
The s t a t u t o r y a d o p t i o n o f expanded r e g u l a t o r y r a t i o n a l e s s h o u l d f u r t h e r
c o n t r i b u t e t o a changed j u d i c i a l p e r s p e c t i v e . As p r e v i o u s l y noted, t h e o p i n i o n
i n Buckley v. Valeo made c l e a r t h a t c o r r u p t i o n was t h e o n l y r a t i o n a l e r e c i t e d by
Congress f o r
[*126]
i t s 1974 r e s t r i c t i o n s on campaign f i n a n c e . n l 4 8 That
was u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , g i v e n t h e Watergate p r e o c c u p a t i o n s o f t h e t i m e . n l 4 9 By
c l e a r i m p l i c a t i o n , however, t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l balance remained open t o t h e
i n v o c a t i o n o f w i d e r purposes.
-Footnotesn l 4 8 See supra, p a r t
III.D.
n l 4 9 See g e n e r a l l y W i n t e r , supra note 15.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
T h i s much i s suggested a l s o by a p a r a l l e l course o f d e c i s i o n s i n Oregon.
Deras v. Myers, n l 5 0 t o b e g i n w i t h , was decided t h e year b e f o r e Buckley and
conformably w i t h i t . Deras i n v o l v e d a s t a t e s t a t u t e f i x i n g l i m i t s on campaign
e x p e n d i t u r e s , c h a l l e n g e d under p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e Oregon C o n s t i t u t i o n t h a t a r e
e f f e c t i v e l y i d e n t i c a l t o those i n t h e F i r s t Amendment's f r e e speech and assembly
c l a u s e s . n l 5 1 Once a g a i n t h e r e were no r e c o r d o r l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s t o s u s t a i n
t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r t h e r e s t r i c t i o n : "There i s no evidence i n t h i s case, n o r any
data i n t h e s t u d i e s on campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s d i s c o v e r e d i n our r e s e a r c h , which
would l e a d t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t our system o f government i s i m p e r i l e d by t h e
f r e e e x p e n d i t u r e o f funds i n p o l i t i c a l campaigns." nl52 The Oregon Supreme Court
thereupon i n v a l i d a t e d t h e s t a t u t e , w i t h b r o a d l y sweeping c o n c e p t u a l
pronouncements about t h e i m p e r a t i v e s o f freedom i n f i n a n c i n g campaigns.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
nl50
535 P.2d
541
(Or.
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
1975).
n l 5 1 I d . a t 542 ( c i t i n g Or. Const, a r t . I , s e c t i o n s 8, 2 6 ) .
n l 5 2 I d . a t 545.
�) LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS"
"6<^
A
m c r n b c r
o t
t h
" « Rccd Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS"
' ^ ^ A mcmbcr of ihe Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 33
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *126
-End
Footnotes-
F i f t e e n years l a t e r , however, a s l i g h t change o f p e r c e i v e d r a t i o n a l e
produced a v e r y d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t . I n r e Fadeley nl53 a g a i n concerned a r e s t r a i n t
on e l e c t i o n f i n a n c e s , t h i s t i m e as a p p l i e d t o a supreme c o u r t j u s t i c e charged
w i t h improper campaign conduct. Now t h e o t h e r j u s t i c e s were a b l e t o assess
f i r s t h a n d , from t h e i r own e x p e r i e n c e , t h e importance o f p r o t e c t i n g t h e i n t e g r i t y
of o f f i c i a l conduct. The c o u r t d i d n o t f i n d Deras and Buckley c o n t r o l l i n g :
" P o l i t i c a l e x p r e s s i o n i s a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e v a l u e s expressed i n t h e F i r s t
Amendment. However, even i n t h e most s e n s i t i v e area o f p u b l i c d i s c o u r s e , n o t
every law and r e g u l a t i o n l i m i t i n g speech i s u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . " n l 5 4 Unable t o
c a r r y t h e day, two members o f t h e c o u r t f i l e d a l e n g t h y , r i g i d ,
[*127]
i d e o l o g i c a l d i s s e n t , n l 5 5 b u t t h i s t i m e i t d i d n o t c a r r y t h e day. For t h e c o u r t
as a whole saw t h e q u e s t i o n as b e i n g "whether t h e o f f s e t t i n g s o c i e t a l
i n t e r e s t - - w h e t h e r d e r i v e d from t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o r from some o t h e r s o u r c e - - i s o f
fundamental importance t o a degree a k i n t o t h e concerns expressed i n t h e
c o n s t i t u t i o n . " n l 5 6 Upholding p u b l i c c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e i n t e g r i t y o f government
i s one such v a l u e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl53
802 P.2d 31
(Or.
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1990).
n l 5 4 I d . a t 41 ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d ) .
nl55 Id. at 46-65
(Unis, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part).
nl56 Id. at 40.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B. J u d i c i a l Argument
F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r ' s 1924 i n s i s t e n c e t h a t " t h e s t u f f o f [ c o n s t i t u t i o n a l ]
c o n t e s t s a r e f a c t s , and judgment upon f a c t s " n l 5 7 was b u t t r e s s e d by a s t r i n g o f
i l l u s t r a t i v e cases, headed by two w i t h outcomes t h a t were a t v a r i a n c e w i t h each
o t h e r . These were Lochner v. New York, n l 5 8 which d e c l a r e d a l l r e s t r i c t i o n s on
working hours t o be an i m p e r m i s s i b l e i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t h e l i b e r t y o f c o n t r a c t ,
and M u l l e r v. Oregon, n l 5 9 which u p h e l d such r e s t r i c t i o n s when shown t o be
reasonable. The lawyer r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o c u r i n g t h i s d i v e r g e n c e was
F r a n k f u r t e r ' s predecessor and mentor, L o u i s Dembitz Brandeis--a b r i l l i a n t
advocate a t t h e b a r b e f o r e he became a J u s t i c e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl57 Frankfurter, supra note 1, at 1002.
nl58
138 U.S.
nl59 208 U.S.
45
412
(1905).
(1908).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Oregon had adopted a 10-hour l i m i t on i n d u s t r i a l work by women. Brandeis
�LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
8
LEXIS-NEXIS'
inbcr of the Rccd HIM
r pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS'
• ^ ^ ^ A member of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 34
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *127
sought t o a v o i d t h e Lochner condemnation o f such l i m i t s , and t o show t h e
reasonableness o f t h e Oregon law, by drawing on g e n e r a l knowledge and common
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o u t s i d e t h e covers o f t h e law books. n l 6 0 Working w i t h h i s
s i s t e r - i n - l a w , Josephine Goldmark, he mustered a s m a l l army o f r e s e a r c h e r s who
combed t h e Columbia U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , t h e New York P u b l i c L i b r a r y , and t h e
L i b r a r y o f Congress. n l 6 1
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl60 Jd. at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
415-16.
nl61 Ronald K. L. Collins & Jennifer Frieson, Looking Back on Muller v.
Oregon, 69A.B.A.
J. 294, 296-97
(1983).
-End
Footnotes-
What t h e y produced was a new k i n d o f a p p e l l a t e b r i e f , c o n t a i n i n g two pages
o f law and dozens o f pages o f f a c t s - - a s d e p i c t e d i n r e p o r t s by p h y s i c i a n s ,
s o c i o l o g i s t s , c r i m i n o l o g i s t s , and e x p e r t s i n housing and hygiene. n l 6 2 These
c a r r i e d t h e day.
[*128]
J u s t i c e Brewer, w r i t i n g f o r a unanimous Supreme
Court, s u s t a i n e d t h e Oregon law, drawing on t h e Brandeis b r i e f by name f o r i t s
c o l l e c t i o n o f laws and r e p o r t s showing dangers t o women and d i m i n u t i o n s o f
p r o d u c t i v i t y a r i s i n g from o v e r l y l o n g hours o f work. These m a t e r i a l s , w h i l e n o t
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a u t h o r i t i e s , were " s i g n i f i c a n t o f a widespread b e l i e f " i n t h e
n e c e s s i t y f o r such l e g i s l a t i o n . J u s t i c e Brewer c o n t i n u e d :
- Footnotesnl62 Id.; see also Julius Cohen, The Labor-Welfare Cases: A Socio-Legal
Approach, 10 U. Chi. L. Rev. 375, 378-80
(1943).
-End
Footnotes-
When a q u e s t i o n o f f a c t i s debated and d e b a t a b l e , and t h e e x t e n t t o which a
s p e c i a l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n goes i s a f f e c t e d by t h e t r u t h i n r e s p e c t t o
t h a t f a c t , a widespread and l o n g c o n t i n u e d b e l i e f c o n c e r n i n g i t i s w o r t h y o f
c o n s i d e r a t i o n . We t a k e j u d i c i a l cognizance o f a l l m a t t e r s o f g e n e r a l knowledge.
nl63
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl63 M u l l e r ,
208 U.S. a t
-Footnotes- -
420-21.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
That i n v i t a t i o n s h o u l d a p p l y as w e l l t o a r e v i e w o f campaign f i n a n c i n g
legislation.
I n t h e M u l l e r case, t h e f a c t u a l p r e s e n t a t i o n was l e a n and s i m p l e . n l 6 4 I t
i n c l u d e d a r e c i t a t i o n o f laws, b o t h s t a t e and f o r e i g n , showing how i n d u s t r i a l
democracies had viewed t h e need f o r c u r t a i l m e n t o f women's work hours. I t
o f f e r e d an o u t l i n e o f experience, a b s t r a c t i n g t h e e s s e n t i a l s o f l e g i s l a t i v e
h e a r i n g s and debates, h i s t o r i e s and handbooks, s t a t i s t i c s and r e p o r t s by
i n d u s t r i a l and medical commissions, a u t h o r s and i n v e s t i g a t o r s , and o t h e r s . These
�H
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A» member of' the Reed Elsevier pk group
- -~
—' "
f
k
B
<
C l
;
LEXIS-NEXIS
-6^*
m
c
m
b
c
r
of the Reed Elsevier
group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS
*
^' £ 5 ^ A
1
mcmbcr of the -Rccd Elsevier pk group
- -••
D
1
�Page 35
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *128
were a r r a n g e d c o h e r e n t l y under o u t l i n e headings such as "Dangers," " B e n e f i t s , "
and "Reasonableness." The p r e s e n t a t i o n proved e f f e c t i v e .
- Footnotesnl64 See Brief for Defendant in Error, Muller,
208 U.S. at 412, reprinted in
Louis D. Brandeis & Josephine Goldmark, Women in Industry 10 (1969) and also
summarized in Muller,
208 U.S. at 419-20
n.l.
-End FootnotesThe Brandeis b r i e f , as i t came t o be known, n l 6 5 emerged as a weapon a g a i n s t
the r i g i d i d e o l o g i c a l dogma o f " l i b e r t y o f c o n t r a c t , " a concept nowhere
expressed i n t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n i t s e l f , and e v e n t u a l l y abandoned--but o n l y a f t e r
the t h r e a t o f F r a n k l i n Roosevelt's C o u r t - p a c k i n g p l a n persuaded one J u s t i c e t o
s h i f t over i n f a v o r o f o v e r r u l i n g Lochner v. New York. n l 6 6
- Footnotesnl65 For a detailed discussion of the "Brandeis Brief," see Bernard Schwartz,
Supreme Court Superstars: The Ten Greatest Justices, 31 Tulsa L.J.
93,
122-23
(1995) .
nl66 For a h i s t o r y o f t h e C o u r t - p a c k i n g p l a n , see Robert H. Jackson, The
S t r u g g l e f o r J u d i c i a l Supremacy v i - v i i i , 187-92 (1941).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*129]
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I n i t s own day, w i t h t h e c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e Court as i t t h e n was, t h e r e was
no chance t h a t any argument would persuade t h e J u s t i c e s t o j e t t i s o n " l i b e r t y o f
c o n t r a c t . " The Brandeis b r i e f had t o accept t h a t p r e v a i l i n g d o c t r i n e , and argue
w i t h i n i t s c o n f i n e s . T h i s Brandeis d i d s u c c e s s f u l l y : The judgment o f t h e Court
i n M u l l e r v. Oregon was t h a t " f o r these reasons, and w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n i n g i n any
r e s p e c t t h e d e c i s i o n i n Lochner v. New York, . . . t h e judgment o f t h e Supreme
Court o f Oregon i s a f f i r m e d . " n l 6 7
-Footnotes- nl67 Muller, 208 U.S.
at
423.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
That avenue i s open, and may be necessary, t o g a i n r e l i e f from t h e e q u a l l y
i d e o l o g i c a l c o n f i n e s o f Bucklev v. Valeo. n l 6 8 Perhaps t h e o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e
Supreme Court's emerging m a j o r i t y has changed, o r i s changing, s u f f i c i e n t l y t o
p e r m i t an o v e r r u l i n g o f t h a t decision,- perhaps n o t . n l 6 9 A sound l i t i g a t i n g
s t r a t e g y w i l l be a t t e n t i v e t o b o t h p o s s i b i l i t i e s .
- Footnotesn l 6 8 A t l e a s t one o t h e r commentator has found t h e comparison p e r s u a s i v e . See
David Cole, F i r s t Amendment A n t i t r u s t : The End o f L a i s s e z - F a i r e i n Campaign
Finance, 9 Yale L. & Pol'y Rev. 236, 271-72 (1991).
�f|
LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A member of the Reed F.lscvier pic group
|y
LEXIS-NEXIS*
^i^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
©
LEXIS-NEXIS"
member of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 36
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 129
n l 6 9 The New York Times may t a k e t h e former view, see supra n o t e 16, b u t
Common Cause takes t h e l a t t e r . L e t t e r from Fred Wertheimer, P r e s i d e n t o f Common
Cause, Apr. 25, 1994 (on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) . Buckley i s now t w e n t y years o l d , o f
course, whereas Lochner had been decided o n l y two years b e f o r e M u l l e r .
-End
Footnotes-
I t i s u n f o r t u n a t e t o have t o say so, b u t i n r e c e n t years t h e Supreme Court
champions o f f r e e speech have managed t o wrap i t i n dogmatic c l o t h i n g t h a t
s t i f l e s t h e c i r c u l a t i o n o f ideas and e x p r e s s i o n . That e f f e c t can be shown, i n
any g i v e n case, by f a c t u a l d i s t i n c t i o n s t h a t escape t h e reach o f Buckley w i t h o u t
n e c e s s a r i l y o v e r r u l i n g i t . I t can a l s o be shown, by p o l i c y and l e g a l as w e l l as
f a c t u a l documentation, i n a way t h a t undermines t h e c o n t i n u i n g v a l i d i t y o f t h a t
d e c i s i o n . Good l a w y e r s , l i k e L o u i s Brandeis, w i l l know how t o argue such
o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n the a l t e r n a t i v e .
[*130]
Appendices
A. Sample L e g i s l a t i o n *
* T h i s sample b i l l i s adapted from Wisconsin Assembly B i l l 1167 (1994),
i n t r o d u c e d by R e p r e s e n t a t i v e Peter Bock and (as a Senate c o u n t e r p a r t ) by
Senator David Helbach--the v i c e chairman and chairman, r e s p e c t i v e l y , o f t h e
Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e C o u n c i l ' s S p e c i a l Committee on Campaign F i n a n c i n g . See
Roland Hornet, Memorandum from t h e a u t h o r t o t h e Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e Reference
Bureau (Feb. 24, 1994); see a l s o E l e c t i o n Reform Hearings Before t h e Wisconsin
Assembly Comm., supra note 180 ( t e s t i m o n y o f Roland Hornet).
S e c t i o n 1. T h i s s t a t u t e may be c i t e d as t h e Campaign E x p e n d i t u r e L i m i t a t i o n
Act.
S e c t i o n 2. FINDINGS OF FACT. The l e g i s l a t u r e , drawing on i t s c o l l e c t i v e
experience w i t h campaigns f o r p u b l i c o f f i c e and on t h e independent evidence
p r e s e n t e d t o i t by q u a l i f i e d a n a l y s t s , f i n d s and d e c l a r e s t h a t :
( I ) T h i s s t a t e has h i s t o r i c a l l y e x p e r i e n c e d a h i g h l e v e l o f c i v i c
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n r e s p o n s i b l e government which, however, i s now i n d e c l i n e as t h e
d i r e c t r e s u l t o f campaign f i n a n c i n g arrangements t h a t have t h e c l e a r tendency t o
d i s t a n c e v o t e r s from t h e e l e c t o r a l process, and t h a t are c o n s t r a i n e d from
c o r r e c t i o n by a p p l i c a b l e r u l i n g s o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme Court.
( I I ) C u r r e n t campaign f i n a n c i n g arrangements, w i t h t h e i r p e r c e i v e d
p r e f e r e n t i a l access t o lawmakers f o r s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s capable o f c o n t r i b u t i n g
s i z a b l e sums t o lawmakers' campaigns, have provoked p u b l i c d i s a f f e c t i o n w i t h
e l e c t i v e government, as m a n i f e s t e d by d e c l i n e s i n v o t i n g percentages and i n
voluntary tax-check-off p a r t i c i p a t i o n .
( I I I ) The s t a t e ' s c h e c k - o f f system has l o s t p o p u l a r s u p p o r t because i t does
not d i m i n i s h t h e p e r c e i v e d p r e f e r e n t i a l access o f t h e s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s and i s
t h e r e f o r e judged t o be i n e f f e c t i v e .
(IV) Before 1976, t h i s s t a t e , a l o n g w i t h 33 o t h e r s t a t e s , had these m a t t e r s
under r e g u l a t o r y c o n t r o l t h r o u g h a system o f mandatory spending l i m i t s
�-
I LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
^
1
LEXIS-NEXIS
^ ^ A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS- ^ j ^ A mcmbcr of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 37
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 130
a p p l i c a b l e t o a l l candidates f o r s t a t e e l e c t i v e o f f i c e .
[*131]
(V) The U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme Court, i n B u c k l e y v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976),
i n v a l i d a t e d a l l such spending l i m i t s w h i l e a p p r o v i n g campaign c o n t r i b u t i o n
limits.
(VI) Since t h a t t i m e , campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s have r i s e n s t e e p l y , d o u b l i n g i n
t h i s s t a t e ' s l e g i s l a t i v e races s i n c e 1980. The a d d i t i o n has been made up
p r i n c i p a l l y by c o n t r i b u t i o n s from s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s .
( V I I ) C o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s are inadequate by themselves t o check t h i s t r e n d .
As l o n g as spending i s e f f e c t i v e l y u n r e s t r a i n e d , c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i l l f i n d ways t o
p r o t e c t f a v o r e d c a n d i d a t e s from b e i n g o u t s p e n t .
( V I I I ) Among such ways have been p e r s o n a l spending by w e a l t h y c a n d i d a t e s ,
independent e x p e n d i t u r e s t h a t f a v o r o r oppose an i d e n t i f i e d c a n d i d a t e , and t h e
use o f p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s as c o n d u i t s f o r the support o f s e l e c t e d c a n d i d a t e s .
(IX) Experience shows i n p a r t i c u l a r t h a t s o - c a l l e d "independent"
support--whether by i n d i v i d u a l s , committees, o r o t h e r e n t i t i e s - - c a n be
c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h a c a n d i d a t e ' s campaign, by means o f i n f o r m a l "understandings,"
w i t h o u t l o s i n g i t s p r o f e s s e d l y independent c h a r a c t e r . L i k e w i s e , c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o
a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , o s t e n s i b l y f o r " p a r t y - b u i l d i n g " purposes, can be and are
r o u t e d , by d e s i g n , t o t h e support o f i d e n t i f i e d c a n d i d a t e s .
(X) P u b l i c f i n a n c i n g cannot cure t h e problem so l o n g as spending l i m i t s are
so r e a d i l y evadable. A f t e r f i f t e e n years o f experience w i t h t h e p r e s e n t law, and
a f o r t y - t w o p e r c e n t d e c l i n e i n t a x c h e c k - o f f c o n t r i b u t i o n s , i t has become
e v i d e n t t h a t t h i s s t a t e ' s v o t e r s a w a i t some s u c c e s s f u l r e p a i r o f t h e campaign
f i n a n c e system b e f o r e t h e y w i l l g i v e i t t h e i r f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t .
(XI) The l e g i s l a t u r e agrees w i t h t h e 1992 f i n d i n g of t h e C a l i f o r n i a
Commission on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , made a f t e r e i g h t years of s t u d y , t h a t an
e f f e c t i v e remedy t o t h i s problem r e q u i r e s t h e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f Buckley v.
Valeo. We b e l i e v e w i t h t h a t commission t h a t i t i s " s t r o n g l y d e s i r a b l e t o p r e s e n t
the Supreme Court w i t h c a r e f u l l y researched data and arguments so t h a t i t can
c o n s i d e r u p h o l d i n g reasonable spending l i m i t a t i o n s . " T h i s a c t i s i n t e n d e d t o
serve t h a t purpose.
( X I I ) The Supreme Court based i t s Buckley d e c i s i o n on a concern t h a t
spending l i m i t s c o u l d r e s t r i c t p o l i t i c a l speech, "by r e s t r i c t i n g t h e number o f
issues d i s c u s s e d , t h e
[*132]
depth of t h e i r e x p l o r a t i o n , and t h e s i z e o f t h e
audience reached." The experience o f those engaged i n t h e e l e c t o r a l process i s
o t h e r w i s e . I t i s u n l i m i t e d e x p e n d i t u r e t h a t can drown o r d i s t o r t p o l i t i c a l
d i s c o u r s e i n a f l o o d of d i s t r a c t i v e r e p e t i t i o n .
( X I I I ) The l e a s t d i s t o r t e d and most i n s t r u c t i v e channels o f campaign
communication are o f t e n f r e e o r i n e x p e n s i v e : debates, c a l l - i n programs, l o c a l
i n t e r v i e w s , and o t h e r v o t e r c o n n e c t i o n s t h a t are n o t dependent on t h e power of
money.
(XIV) The expanded use o f such l o w - c o s t channels, s t i m u l a t e d by t h e a d o p t i o n
of s e n s i b l e spending l i m i t s , w i l l b e n e f i t p o l i t i c a l d i s c o u r s e by drawing
c a n d i d a t e s out of t h e packaged w o r l d of media a d v e r t i s e m e n t s and i n t o t h e r e a l
w o r l d o f v o t e r engagement and a c c o u n t a b i l i t y .
�LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
mcmbcr of rhe Reed F.lscvier pk group
f f j LEXIS-NEXIS'
4
1
r
k
D
1
1
'^ ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
^
- - —
•
LEXIS-NEXIS'
^• ^ ^ *
A
L
:
1
mcmbcr '"• ihe Reed Elsevier pit group
'
of - ••—'
•
�Page 38
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 132
(XV) T u r n i n g down the n o i s e l e v e l of campaign communication t h r o u g h
reasonable spending l i m i t s w i l l a l s o i n c r e a s e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r newer and
q u i e t e r v o i c e s t o be heard. I t w i l l t e n d t o i n c r e a s e t h e number, depth, and
d i v e r s i t y of ideas p r e s e n t e d t o t h e p u b l i c .
(XVI) F i n a l l y , a reasonable l i m i t on campaign spending w i l l r e l i e v e
candidates and o f f i c e h o l d e r s a l i k e from t h e c o n s t a n t n e c e s s i t y o f engaging i n
d e f e n s i v e f u n d - r a i s i n g , a r i s i n g as t h i s does from t h e c o n t i n u a l r i s k of
m a s s i v e l y f i n a n c e d o p p o s i t i o n c h a l l e n g e s t o e v e r y t h i n g t h e y may say o r do. The
conduct o f b o t h campaigns and o f f i c e h o l d e r s w i l l t h e r e b y be improved.
S e c t i o n 3. DECLARATION OF PURPOSES. The purposes o f t h i s c h a p t e r are t o :
( I ) Restore t h e p u b l i c c o n f i d e n c e i n , and the i n t e g r i t y o f , t h e democratic
system i n t h i s s t a t e ;
( I I ) S t r e n g t h e n and promote f u l l and f r e e campaign d i s c u s s i o n and
debate;
( I I I ) R e l i e v e e l e c t i v e o f f i c e - s e e k e r s and o f f i c e - h o l d e r s from t h e
l i m i t a t i o n s on p u r p o s i v e p o l i t i c a l conduct and d i s c o u r s e t h a t can a r i s e
excessive a t t e n t i o n t o f u n d - r a i s i n g ; and
from
(IV) Reduce c o r r u p t i o n and undue i n f l u e n c e , o r t h e appearance t h e r e o f ,
the f i n a n c i n g of s t a t e e l e c t i o n campaigns.
S e c t i o n 4. OPERATIONAL PROVISIONS
( I ) Mandatory Spending L i m i t s
in
[*133]
(a) The disbursement l i m i t a t i o n s p e c i f i e d elsewhere i n t h i s a c t f o r e l e c t i o n
t o any o f f i c e s h a l l serve as an o v e r a l l c e i l i n g on disbursements made, and
o b l i g a t i o n s i n c u r r e d , by:
( i ) t h e c a n d i d a t e and h i s o r her p e r s o n a l campaign committee,
p e r s o n a l resources o r from p u b l i c o r p r i v a t e c o n t r i b u t i o n s ; and
whether from
( i i ) a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y committee, t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t i d e n t i f i a b l y
advocates t h e e l e c t i o n o f t h e c a n d i d a t e o r t h e d e f e a t o f any o f h i s o r her
opponents.
(b) The c a n d i d a t e and h i s o r her p e r s o n a l campaign committee s h a l l be
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r compliance w i t h t h i s o v e r a l l c e i l i n g .
held
(c) Any o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l o r committee t h a t makes a disbursement o r i n c u r s an
o b l i g a t i o n t o advocate t h e e l e c t i o n o r d e f e a t o f a c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d c a n d i d a t e
s h a l l be l i m i t e d f o r t h i s purpose t o disbursements o r o b l i g a t i o n s t o t a l i n g n o t
more than $ 500. T h i s l i m i t a t i o n s h a l l not a p p l y t o disbursements o r o b l i g a t i o n s
made o r i n c u r r e d i n t h e o r d i n a r y course o f business by t h e independent news
media, nor t o i n t e r n a l communications between an o r g a n i z a t i o n and i t s members.
(II) Inseverability
(a) I f any p a r t of t h i s a c t i s found o r h e l d t o be i n v a l i d , a l l o f i t s
p r o v i s i o n s s h a l l thereupon t e r m i n a t e and cease t o have e f f e c t .
[*134]
�-
I LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
#i
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
A
•^^A
1
f
J
:
member of (he Reed Elsevier '- group
pic
#i
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
^- ^ ^ *
A
1
1
L
,
member of thc Rccd—
' Elsevier pic group
'-
�Page 39
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 134
B. Specimen J u d i c i a l
I.
Brief
STATEMENT OF THE LAW
(A) Political campaign expenditures are a form of constitutionally protected
speech. Buckley
v. Valeo,
424 U.S. 1
(1976).
(B) But reasonably justified restrictions are permitted. Bucklev
424 U.S. at 95, 107-08;
Republican
N a f l Comm. v. FEC, 487 F. Supp.
(S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 445 U.S. 955
(1980).
v. Valeo,
280
(C) Newly presented facts may justify a previously disallowed restriction.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 854 (1992);
see also Muller v.
Oregon, 208 U.S. 412, 420-21
(1908).
(D) Expanded purposes may likewise justify
such restrictions. Buckley,
424 U.S. at 26-27,
45, 53; FEC v. National
Conservative Political Action Comm., 470 U.S. 480, 496-97
(1985).
Compare Deras
v. Meyers,
535 P.2d 541 (Or. 1975) with In re Fadeley, 802 P.2d 31 (Or.
1990).
(E) L e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and d e c l a r a t i o n s o f purpose, s u p p o r t e d by a
c o n s i d e r e d body o f i n f o r m e d o p i n i o n , a r e e n t i t l e d f o r these purposes t o r e s p e c t .
G l i d d e n Co. v . Zdanok, 370 U.S. 530 (1962); M u l l e r v . Oregon, 208 U.S. 412
(1908). Compare F i r s t N a t ' l Bank v . B e l l o t t i , 435 U.S. 765, 789 (1978) (absence
of l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s ) w i t h FEC v. N a t i o n a l R i g h t t o Work Comm., 459 U.S. 197,
209-10 (1982) ( l e g i s l a t i v e judgments on m a t t e r s o f p o l i t i c a l f a c t e n t i t l e d t o
respect).
I I . STATEMENT OF FACTS
(A) Adverse E f f e c t s o f U n l i m i t e d Campaign E x p e n d i t u r e s
l . i n t h e f i r s t t w e l v e years a f t e r 1976, when Bucklev v. Valeo was decided,
t o t a l spending by c a n d i d a t e s f o r s t a t e e l e c t i v e o f f i c e s o f a l l k i n d s i n c r e a s e d
by 450 p e r c e n t , n l
- Footnotesn l H e r b e r t E. Alexander, Reform and R e a l i t y : t h e F i n a n c i n g o f S t a t e and L o c a l
Campaigns 7 (1991).
-End
Footnotes-
2. Congressional campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s from 1974 t o 1990 rose a comparable
600 p e r c e n t , o r 300 p e r c e n t i n c o n s t a n t d o l [*135]
l a r s . n2 I n 1974, t h e
average c o s t o f a w i n n i n g House race was $ 52,000; by 1992 t h e c o s t had reached
$ 555,000, f a r above t h e i n f l a t i o n - a d j u s t e d l e v e l o f $ 152,000. n3
- Footnotesn2 Campaign Finance Reform: Hearings Before t h e Task Force on Campaign
Finance Reform o f t h e House Comm. on Admin., 102d Cong., 1 s t Sess. 59 (1991)
[ h e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform] ( t e s t i m o n y and statement o f
C u r t i s B. Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r t h e Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
n3 E l l e n S. M i l l e r , Remarks t o a F i r s t Amendment C o n s u l t a t i o n (Apr. 19,
�LEXIS-NEXIS"
LEXIS'-NEXIS
LEXIS-NEXIS"
"^^A
• ^ ^ ^ A member of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
mcmbcr of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 40
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 135
1993). Ms. M i l l e r i s t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r o f t h e Center f o r Responsible
P o l i t i c s , which produced a d e t a i l e d r e p o r t on t h e s p i r a l i n g c o s t o f
c o n g r e s s i o n a l e l e c t i o n s between 1974 and 1986. See Center f o r Responsible
P o l i t i c s , Money and P o l i t i c s : Spending i n Congressional E l e c t i o n s : A
Never-Ending S p i r a l (1988).
-End
Footnotes-
3. The i n c r e a s e i n e l e c t i o n f u n d i n g has been funded v e r y l a r g e l y by
i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s ; i n c o n g r e s s i o n a l campaigns, where d e t a i l e d r e c o r d s are k e p t ,
d i s i n t e r e s t e d and p u b l i c - i n t e r e s t c o n t r i b u t o r s have been o u t s p e n t by r a t i o s o f
20:1 and more, w i t h t h e i n t e r e s t e d money g o i n g o v e r w h e l m i n g l y t o p o l i t i c a l
incumbents, n o t c h a l l e n g e r s , r e g a r d l e s s o f p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y . n4
- Footnotesn4 Center f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s , supra note 3, a t 21-35. The phenomenon
h o l d s t r u e i n s t a t e e l e c t i o n campaigns as w e l l . Common Cause, Campaign Finance
r e f o r m i n t h e S t a t e s 6-7 (1985) .
-End
Footnotes-
4. The impact o f i n t e r e s t e d money on incumbent b e h a v i o r i s s i g n i f i c a n t ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y as regards complex o r l o w - p r o f i l e i s s u e s t h a t t h e press does n o t
f o l l o w i n d e t a i l . n5
- Footnotes-
n5 Senator B i l l S c h l u t e r , Remarks t o t h e Nationwide C o u n c i l on Government
E t h i c s Laws (Sept. 20, 1993).
-End
Footnotes-
5. As campaign spending has gone up, v o t i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n has gone down. n6
I t stands today a t t h e l o w e s t l e v e l o f any democracy i n t h e w o r l d . More t h a n 2 0
m i l l i o n Buckley-era v o t e r s now r e g u l a r l y s t a y home. n7
- Footnotesn6 David B. Magleby & Candice J. Nelson, The Money Chase: C o n g r e s s i o n a l
Campaign Finance Reform 41-42 (1990) .
n7 Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform, supra note 2, a t 59.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
6. America d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d has a l s o e x p e r i e n c e d a sharp d e c l i n e i n census
p a r t i c i p a t i o n and i n v o l u n t a r y t a x compliance. n8 The d e l i b e r a t e u n d e r - r e p o r t i n g
of income t o t h e I n t e r n a l Revenue S e r v i c e i s s a i d t o have r i s e n from two p e r c e n t
i n 1940
[*136]
t o t h i r t y p e r c e n t i n 1985 n9 --a l o n g way from J u s t i c e O l i v e r
Wendell Holmes' o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t "taxes are what I pay f o r c i v i l i z a t i o n . "
-Footnotes-
�^^^^^TM
^^^^^SL™
Mjk LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pit group
# J LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ ^ A* member of the — t'—
* - Reed Elsevier pic group
1
r
K
D
1
1
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
1
mcmbcr of thc—
Reed Elsevier pic grou|
1
D
J
�Page 41
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 136
n8 Paul V o l c k e r , The Endangered C i v i l S e r v i c e , N.Y. Times, Aug. 5, 1990, a t
E19.
n9 John C h a n c e l l o r , P e r i l and Promise: A Commentary on America 111 (1990) .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7. There i s a l i n k a g e among these f a c t o r s . C a r e f u l l y conducted focus group
surveys f i n d t h a t v o t e r s b e l i e v e l o b b y i s t s have r e p l a c e d l e g i s l a t o r s as t h e
p r i m a r y p o l i t i c a l a c t o r s , and t h a t campaign c o n t r i b u t i o n s determine p o l i t i c a l
outcomes more t h a n v o t i n g . nlO When people today c l a i m t h a t " t h e i r v o t e doesn't
count," t h e y are making a statement o f p e r c e i v e d f a c t : v o t e r s don't choose
lobbyists.
-FootnotesnlO The K e t t e r i n g Foundation, C i t i z e n s and P o l i t i c s : A View Form Main S t r e e t
America 19-20 (1991).
-End
Footnotes-
8. The I n s t i t u t e f o r Southern S t u d i e s ' "Money and P o l i t i c s " p r o j e c t has
found s p e c i f i c a l l y t h a t "the money chase d r i v e s v o t e r s from t h e p o l l s ,
discourages p o t e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e s from r u n n i n g , l i m i t s who has access t o e l e c t e d
o f f i c i a l s and government b u r e a u c r a t s , r e s t r i c t s what g e t s d i s c u s s e d , and
t r a n s f o r m s p o l i t i c s from a mass-based, v o l u n t a r y endeavor t o h i g h - s t a k e s ,
h i g h - t e c h dealmaking among p r o f e s s i o n a l i n s i d e r s . " n i l
- Footnotesn i l Bob H a l l , Who Owns t h e Government?, Southern Exposure, Summer 1992, a t
14, 15.
-End
Footnotes-
9. C o n t r a r y t o t h e a n t i c i p a t i o n i n Bucklev v. Valeo, i t i s u n l i m i t e d
e x p e n d i t u r e s , n o t e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s , t h a t drown o r d i s t o r t campaign
communication. I n 1984, t o t a k e one example, f u l l y 95 p e r c e n t o f C a l i f o r n i a ' s
l e g i s l a t i v e races were f i n a n c i a l l y n o n - c o m p e t i t i v e ; n l 2 i n those c o n t e s t s , t h e
v o t e r s e f f e c t i v e l y c o u l d n o t hear what one o f t h e c a n d i d a t e s was s a y i n g .
- Footnotesn l 2 C a l i f o r n i a Comm'n on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , The New Gold Rush: F i n a n c i n g
C a l i f o r n i a ' s L e g i s l a t i v e Campaigns, Summary Report 3 (1985).
-End
Footnotes-
10. The h i g h c o s t o f p a i d campaign communications serves t o exclude
c o m p e t i t i o n from t h e b a l l o t box. F i g u r e s compiled from U.S. Senate races i n
1974-1984 show t h a t media e x p e n d i t u r e s per v o t e r i n c r e a s e d t h i r t e e n f o l d i n the
races t h a t were c o m p e t i t i v e d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d , n l 3 from $ 0.67 per v o t e t o $
7.74. Candidates unable t o match t h a t pace s i m p l y l o s t t h e i r v o i c e .
�T
M
tI
M
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ A
member o f thc R c c d Elsevier p k group
^^^^
^^^
#i
M
LEXIS-NEXIS'
1
c
D
J
•^ ^ ^ A* member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
^
^^^V
.^^^
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS*
^
-
»
>
1-.1• Elsevier
^ ^ A member of the Reed I T . - . . : - _ •pk group
�Page 42
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *136
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
n l 3 Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform, supra note 2, a t 62.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
11. The n a t u r e and purpose o f p a i d media e x p r e s s i o n s i n p o l i t i c a l campaign
i s more t o i n g r a t i a t e t h a n t o i n f o r m . The
[*137]
practice i n well-financed
campaigns today i s , f i r s t , t o h i r e p o l l s t e r s t o measure what v o t e r s t h i n k t h e y
want; second, t o c u t t h e c a n d i d a t e ' s c l o t h ( o r c u t up t h e opponent's) t o conform
t o those measurements; and t h i r d , t o produce and p r e s e n t p a i d commercials a t
s a t u r a t i o n l e v e l , d i s p l a y i n g i n engaging terms t h e a r t i f i c i a l r e s u l t . n l 4
- Footnotesn l 4 Center For N a t ' l . Independence i n P o l i t i c s , The V o t e r ' s
Manual: P r o j e c t Vote Smart 4-5 (1992).
-End
Self-Defense
Footnotes-
12. The spending i n c r e a s e s e x p e r i e n c e d s i n c e Buckley v. Valeo have gone
l a r g e l y f o r these i n s t r u m e n t s o f m a n i p u l a t i o n , which t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
a u t h o r i t y Paul Freund d e s c r i b e d as o n l y " m i n i m a l l y t h e k i n d o f speech o r
communication t h a t i s t o be p r o t e c t e d . " n l 5 They have l i t t l e i n common w i t h
James Madison's idea o f f r e e speech.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n l 5 Paul A. Freund, Commentary, i n Federal R e g u l a t i o n o f Campaign Finance:
Some C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Questions 74 ( A l b e r t J. Rosenthal ed., 1972).
-End
Footnotes-
13. The onrush o f new media t e c h n o l o g y i s a c c e l e r a t i n g t h e t r e n d s t o
u n i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , c o m p e t i t i v e p r e c l u s i o n , and m a n i p u l a t i o n . As t h e Wall S t r e e t
Journal describes i t :
L o s t i n t h e r u s h t o win, sometimes a t any c o s t , i s t h e q u a i n t n o t i o n o f a
t h o u g h t f u l c a n d i d a t e w i l l i n g t o t a k e time t o e x p l a i n , s l o w l y and w i s e l y , h i s o r
her p o s i t i o n s on major p o l i c y i s s u e s . What counts a r e t r a c k i n g p o l l s , focus
groups, d i a l groups, "wave f r o n t s " and d i g i t a l TV e d i t i n g machines, and a
c a n d i d a t e capable o f r a i s i n g t h e huge amounts o f cash needed t o pay f o r t h e
technology. n l 6
-Footnotesn l 6 James M. Perry, Young Guns: A Second G e n e r a t i o n o f P o l i t i c a l Handlers
Outduels Forebears: S e l f - s t y l e d 'Barbarians' Use New Mecha S k i l l s t o Run F a s t e r ,
Meaner Races: 'We're A l l Technocrats Now', Wall S t . J . , Jan. 10, 1994, a t A l .
-End
Footnotes-
�I LEXIS-NEXIS"
k . . « f .W. D . . ^ J
:
i.
- ^ ^ ^ Ak member of thc Reed C l
Elsevier pk. group
#i
^ ^ ^ ^
1
LEXIS-NEXIS
i
i
• _
^ ^ A k member of ihe D
Reed r i
Elsevier _ i _ group
pk
LEXIS-NEXIS
A mcmbcr of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 43
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 137
14. I n f a c t u n l i m i t e d spending makes f o r incoherence i n t h e management o f
p o l i t i c a l campaigns: "Most campaigns today have no o v e r a l l p l a n ; t h e y proceed ad
hoc w i t h o u t budgets o r t i m e l i n e s because t h e i r e x p e n d i t u r e s a r e open ended." n l 7
- Footnotesn l 7 Thomas Mann, D i r e c t o r o f P o l i t i c a l S t u d i e s a t t h e Brookings I n s t i t u t i o n ,
Remarks a t an American U n i v e r s i t y Conference on Campaign Management (Dec. 1 1 ,
1992) ( t r a n s c r i p t on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*138]
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
15. The heavy r e l i a n c e o f p o l i t i c i a n s on p a i d e x p r e s s i o n has a l s o b r o u g h t
about "the p o l i t i c a l e q u i v a l e n t o f a S i l e n t S p r i n g i n American p o l i t i c s , " w i t h
s h a r p l y reduced c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . n l 8
- Footnotesn l 8 Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t : Hearings on S.743, S.744, and S.1009 B e f o r e t h e
Subcomm. on Communications o f t h e Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science and
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 100th Cong., 1 s t Sess. 68 (1989) [ H e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on
Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t ] (statement o f C u r t i s Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r t h e
Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
-End Footnotes-
16. Where t h e r e a r e no l i m i t s on spending, by a c h a l l e n g e r o r an incumbent,
b o t h w i l l i n e v i t a b l y f e e l t h e n e c e s s i t y t o r a i s e funds w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n . n l 9
The r e s u l t i s a f i n a n c i a l "arms r a c e , " i n which ( l i k e t h e n u c l e a r arms race o f
the Cold War p e r i o d ) n e i t h e r a d v e r s a r y w i l l accept l i m i t s u n l e s s b o t h a r e
o b l i g e d t o do so. n20
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
n l 9 Magleby & Nelson, supra note 6, a t 197.
n20 See i d . a t 195-96; see a l s o Alexander, supra n o t e 1, a t 17.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
17. An incumbent who needs c o n s t a n t l y t o be r a i s i n g funds f o r t h e n e x t
campaign i s n o t f r e e t o address h i m s e l f t o t h e t a s k s f o r which he o r she was
e l e c t e d , namely, l e g i s l a t i n g and o v e r s e e i n g t h e E x e c u t i v e . As one s t a t e
l e g i s l a t o r p u t i t , " I ' v e been s i t t i n g here f o r two hours t h i s morning t r y i n g
hard t o l i s t e n t o t e s t i m o n y . But a l l I ended up d o i n g was making l i s t s o f people
who might p u t down $ 1,000 f o r a t a b l e a t my n e x t f u n d r a i s e r . " n21
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�I LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS
A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
§ § LEXIS-NEXIS"
• ^ ^ ^ A member of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 44
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 138
n21 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , supra note 12, a t 10.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
18. C h a l l e n g e r s t o o under t h e p r e s e n t system must spend up t o seventy
p e r c e n t o f t h e i r t i m e on f u n d - r a i s i n g e f f o r t s , s e v e r e l y l i m i t i n g t h e t i m e
a v a i l a b l e f o r i s s u e development and v o t e r engagement. n22
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
n22 Center f o r N a t ' l Independence i n P o l i t i c s ,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
supra note 14, a t 4.
- - - - - - - - - - -
19. The f e a r o f sudden, h e a v i l y f i n a n c e d " k i l l e r ads" a g a i n s t an incumbent's
l e g i s l a t i v e d e c i s i o n s has a well-documented c o n s t r i c t i n g e f f e c t on t h e honesty
of debate and t h e q u a l i t y o f d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c ' s b u s i n e s s . n23
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
n23 Hearings on Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t , supra note 18, a t 68.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
20. Faced w i t h such f a c t s , i n 1990, t h e Minnesota l e g i s l a t u r e passed t h e
Congressional Campaign Reform A c t . n24 The l e g i s l a t u r e found and d e c l a r e d t h a t
the need t o r a i s e c o n t r i b u [*139]
t i o n s a t c u r r e n t campaign spending l e v e l s
d i v e r t s c a n d i d a t e s from meeting v o t e r s and engaging t h e i s s u e s o f t h e day.
- Footnotes-
n24 Minn. Stat, sections 10A.40-10A.51 (1991). This statute was later
invalidated on federal preemption grounds in Weber v. Heaney,
793 F. Supp.
(D.
Minn.
1438
1992).
-End
Footnotes-
21. Summarizing more w i d e l y , t h e C a l i f o r n i a Commission on Campaign F i n a n c i n g
found and d e c l a r e d i n 1985 t h a t :
The c r i t i c a l campaign f i n a n c e problem f a c i n g t h e s t a t e i s c a n d i d a t e s '
p o t e n t i a l l y u n l i m i t e d demand f o r money. So l o n g as e l e c t i o n s can be won o r l o s t
by t h e e x p e n d i t u r e o f money, c a n d i d a t e s w i l l devote excessive a t t e n t i o n t o
f u n d r a i s i n g , open themselves t o i n f l u e n c e p e d d l i n g and n e g l e c t i m p o r t a n t s t a t e
i s s u e s . Newcomers w i l l be d e t e r r e d from seeking o f f i c e ; i n c r e a s e d p o l i t i c a l
gamesmanship w i l l t a k e p l a c e i n t h e S t a t e C a p i t o l ; and t h e responsiveness o f t h e
L e g i s l a t u r e w i l l s u f f e r . n25
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
n25 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , supra note 12, a t 13.
�LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
fl
LEXIS-NEXIS'
• ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of rhe Reed F.lscvier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS'
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 45
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *139
-End
Footnotes-
22. There has indeed been a d i s t o r t i o n o f democratic d i s c o u r s e , caused by a
c o m b i n a t i o n o f l i m i t l e s s campaign e x p e n d i t u r e and t h e p r i v a t e - i n t e r e s t f i n a n c i n g
o f p u b l i c o f f i c e . n26 Among t h e enumerated e f f e c t s o f t h i s d i s t o r t i o n a r e t h e
following:
-Footnotesn26 Roland S. Hornet, J r . , R e v i t a l i z i n g American Democracy, Summary o f
F i n d i n g s f o r t h e Woodrow Wilson Center, A p r i l 8, 1992 (on f i l e w i t h t h e a u t h o r ) .
-End
Footnotes-
(a) O v e r a l l , a movement from democracy t o " p o l y a r c h y , " o r from r u l e o f t h e
many t o r u l e o f t h e s e l f s e l e c t e d few, accompanied by movements from law t o
f a v o r i t i s m , from p r e d i c t a b i l i t y t o a r b i t r a r i n e s s , from v o t e r responsiveness t o
funder responsiveness.
(b) The t r i v i a l i z a t i o n o f p o l i t i c s , v i a t e l e v i s i o n , t a b l o i d s , and o t h e r
h i g h - c o s t mass communications, t o t h e p o i n t o f g e n e r a t i n g i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n
the conduct o f o f f i c e . Underattended n a t i o n a l i l l s a r e t h e consequence,
i n c l u d i n g such problems as drugs, d e f i c i t s , and d e f i c i e n t e d u c a t i o n .
(c) P o l i t i c a l and media a t t e n t i o n d i v e r t e d t o s u r f a c e s from depths, w i t h t h e
r e s u l t t h a t major concerns a r e n o t n o t i c e d when t h e y develop, such as t h e
savings and l o a n c r i s i s and t h e u n a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f " b l a c k " defense budgets.
[*140]
(d) A l o s s o f m e a n i n g f u l i n t e r - and i n t r a - p a r t y c o m p e t i t i o n and debate, as
incumbents o f b o t h p a r t i e s r e c e i v e f i n a n c i n g from t h e same i n t e r e s t e d sources.
(B) I n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f V o l u n t a r y L i m i t s
1. C o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s , approved by Buckley v. Valeo, have been unable by
themselves t o check t h e d i s t o r t i o n o f democratic d i s c o u r s e . I t has been w i d e l y
i n e f f e c t t h r o u g h o u t t h e p e r i o d , w i t h o u t r e s t r a i n i n g what we have seen.
2. V o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s l i k e w i s e do n o t h o l d ; t h e y a r e u n d e r c u t by
p e r s o n a l , p a r t y , and s o - c a l l e d "independent" e x p e n d i t u r e s on b e h a l f o f
candidates.
�LEXIS-NEXIS*
LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
- ^ ^ ^ A member of thc Reed Elsevier pic group
mcmbcr of the Reed Elsevier pk group
rtv.rt.kur
rtf
t - k .
D . . ^ J
d . . . . . .
^
n
1^
^
. / 3
»
i
. - . L .
o . - j
1:1
#i
^9^^
LEXIS-NEXIS
•^^A
i O
.
member of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
,
.
�Page 46
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 140
3. Even opponents o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n concede t h a t t h e l i m i t l e s s
c h a r a c t e r o f independent e x p e n d i t u r e , now i n e f f e c t , has made "meaningless"
v o l u n t a r y l i m i t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g . n27
the
-Footnotesn27 ABA S p e c i a l Comm. on E l e c t i o n Reform, Campaign F i n a n c i n g a f t e r Buckley v.
Valeo 2-4 (views o f H e r b e r t A l e x a n d e r ) .
-End
Footnotes-
4. I t i s i m p o s s i b l e as a p r a c t i c a l m a t t e r t o v e r i f y t h e p r o f e s s e d l y
"independent" c h a r a c t e r o f o u t s i d e e x p e n d i t u r e s . I n 1980, e a r l y i n t h e
p o s t - B u c k l e y era, an "independent" committee was o r g a n i z e d t o r a i s e $ 50 m i l l i o n
f o r c a n d i d a t e Ronald Reagan. A t t h e Republican Convention t h a t year, committee
chairman Senator Jesse Helms conceded t h a t i t was d i f f i c u l t t o keep up t h e
appearances o f detachment: " I ' v e had t o , s o r t o f , t a l k i n d i r e c t l y w i t h [Reagan
campaign chairman] Paul L a x a l t and hope t h a t he would pass a l o n g , uh, and I
t h i n k t h e messages have g o t t e n t h r o u g h a l l r i g h t . " The committee and t h e
campaign c o u l d keep a b r e a s t o f each o t h e r , as c o l l a b o r a t i v e businesses do,
t h r o u g h p u b l i c statements i n t h e p r e s s . And t h e committee p o r t r a y e d i t s e l f t o
c o n t r i b u t o r s as h a v i n g i n f l u e n c e w i t h t h e c a n d i d a t e . n28
- Footnotesn28 Anne V. Simonett, The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f R e g u l a t i n g Independent
E x p e n d i t u r e Committees i n P u b l i c l y Funded P r e s i d e n t i a l Campaigns, 18 Harv. J. on
L e g i s . 679, 685-87 (1981).
-End
Footnotes-
5. "Independent" e x p e n d i t u r e s are handy s u b s t i t u t e s f o r r e s t r i c t e d
c o n t r i b u t i o n s o r f o r renounced campaign spending. As an example, an A r i z o n a
i n i t i a t i v e i n 1986 c u r t a i l e d p o l i t i c a l
[*141]
a c t i o n committee (PAC)
c o n t r i b u t i o n s . I n t h e f o l l o w i n g e l e c t i o n i n 1988, PAC c o n t r i b u t i o n s dropped by
s i x t y - t w o p e r c e n t but were f u l l y made up by independent e x p e n d i t u r e s from t h e
same PAC's. n2 9
-Footnotesn29 A r i z o n a Common Cause, New Trends i n A r i z o n a ' s Money & P o l i t i c s : The 1988
L e g i s l a t i v e Races 4, 44 (1990) ( d i s c u s s i n g A r i z o n a ' s P r o p o s i t i o n 200).
-End
Footnotes-
6. A t t h e f e d e r a l l e v e l , "independent" e x p e n d i t u r e s burgeoned from a mere $
2 m i l l i o n i n 1976, when Buckley was decided, t o over $ 21 m i l l i o n i n 1988. n30
They have become an a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e a s s e r t e d l y l i m i t e d c o n t r i b u t i o n s and
e x p e n d i t u r e s o f t h e campaign p r o p e r .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�I LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pit group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS"
'6<^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o | r t h
c Rccd Elsevier pk group
f f i LEXIS-NEXIS"
' 6 ^
A
m
e
m
b
e
r
o l
t h c
R c c d
E'scvier pit group
�Page 47
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *141
n30 S. Rep. No. 37, 102d Cong., 1 s t Sess. 20 (1991).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes- - - - -
7. Wealthy c a n d i d a t e s a r e f r e e t o i g n o r e v o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s , under
the regime o f Buckley. I n Los Angeles, f o r example, a c a r e f u l l y developed 1990
b a l l o t i n i t i a t i v e - - a d o p t i n g a mix o f spending l i m i t s and matching funds--was
s i d e s t e p p e d by t h e mayor e l e c t e d i n 1993. R i c h a r d Riordan's p e r s o n a l spending o f
over $ 6 m i l l i o n exceeded by a m u l t i p l e o f t h r e e t h e $ 2 m i l l i o n c e i l i n g
e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e v o t e r s . n31
-Footnotesn31 Common Cause, Campaign Finance Reform i n t h e S t a t e s 40-41 (1993) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
8. Such spending o u t o f a c a n d i d a t e ' s own resources may n o t be
s e l f - c o r r u p t i n g n32 b u t i t d i s t o r t s t h e e l e c t o r a l system. The e s s e n t i a l l y
l i m i t l e s s c h a r a c t e r o f such e x p e n d i t u r e o b l i g e s t h a t c a n d i d a t e ' s opponents t o
reach f o r ever l a r g e r amounts o f o u t s i d e s u p p o r t , w i t h t h e c o r r u p t i n g r e s u l t s we
have d i s c o v e r e d .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n32 See Bucklev
v.
Valeo,
-Footnotes-
424 U.S.
-End
1,
53
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (1976).
Footnotes-
9. As an example, i n 1992, a w e a l t h y Texas o i l m a n named M i c h a e l H u f f i n g t o n
won h i s f i r s t p u b l i c campaign, f o r a seat i n t h e U.S. House o f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s
from C a l i f o r n i a , by spending $ 5 m i l l i o n o f h i s own money. I n 1994, he
announced f o r a Senate seat from t h e same s t a t e , d e c l a r i n g t h a t he was p r e p a r e d
t o spend up t o $ 15 m i l l i o n o f h i s p r i v a t e f o r t u n e f o r t h i s race. The Senate
incumbent, Dianne F e i n s t e i n , h e r s e l f f r e s h l y e l e c t e d , t o o k t h e t h r e a t s e r i o u s l y ;
her campaign manager s a i d i n e a r l y March o f 1994 t h a t "Dianne's o u t t h e r e
b e a t i n g t h e bushes 24 hours a day f o r money." I t was h a r d t o see how t h i s l e f t
much time f o r s e r v i n g t h e needs o r i n t e r e s t s o f C a l i f o r n i a v o t e r s . n33
- Footnotesn33 B. Drummond Ayres, J r . , C a l i f o r n i a Race For Senate Seen As C o s t l y B a t t l e ,
N.Y. Times, Mar. 11, 1994, a t A12.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*142]
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
10. The i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f v o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s i s accented by t h e
emergence o f s o - c a l l e d " s o f t " money--supposed p a r t y - b u i l d i n g c o n t r i b u t i o n s t h a t
are i n f a c t d i v e r t e d t o c a n d i d a t e s . The e f f e c t o f t h i s copious l o o p h o l e , which
p e r m i t t e d c o n t r i b u t i o n s a t t h e n a t i o n a l l e v e l t o reach $ 43 m i l l i o n i n 1988, i s
t o undercut b o t h t h e small-money c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s approved i n Bucklev v.
Valeo and t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g , which was supposed t o have been
�) LEXIS-NEXIS'
•^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd F.lscvier pk group
#i
*
LEXIS-NEXIS'
. ^ ^O A member of -u. Rccd C I . . . . „ _, group
1
f thc D . . ^ Elsevier pk
• i ^ i
;
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
. /^ ^ A * mcmbcr - f .rhe n - j ci-...:.. _i group
. . of i - Rccd Elsevier pk
- Z)
L
�Page 48
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 142
balanced by a l i m i t a t i o n on p r i v a t e c o n t r i b u t i o n s . n34
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- - - - - -
n34 Report by the Center for Responsive Politics, in Wash. Post, July 26,
1992 at Al; Larry Makinson, Open Secrets: The Encyclopedia of Congressional
Money and Politics 16 (2d ed. 1992). Cf. Buckley
v. Valeo,
424 U.S. 1, 95,
107-08
(1976).
-End Footnotes11. C o r p o r a t i o n and l a b o r u n i o n c o n t r i b u t i o n s , l o n g outlawed by f e d e r a l
s t a t u t e , f l o w unchecked t h r o u g h t h e soft-money window. The t o p c o n t r i b u t o r s t o
the two major p a r t i e s , t h r o u g h t h i s r o u t e , a r e c o r p o r a t i o n s o r l a b o r unions w i t h
s t r o n g i n t e r e s t s i n r e g u l a t o r y p o l i c y . n35
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- - - - -
n35 Center f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s ,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
supra note 34.
-End Footnotes- - - -
12. I n d i v i d u a l c o n t r i b u t o r s have emerged as t h e l a r g e s t sources o f s o f t
money. These donors, some w e a l t h y i n t h e i r own r i g h t b u t many more e x e c u t i v e s o f
c o r p o r a t i o n s o r a s s o c i a t i o n s , were by 1993 o u t s p e n d i n g p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n
committees a t t h e f e d e r a l l e v e l by n e a r l y 2 t o 1. Each p a r t y has s y s t e m a t i c a l l y
encouraged $ 100,000 d o n a t i o n s from these c o n t r i b u t o r s , d a n g l i n g ambassadorships
o r p o l i c y s h i f t s t o a t t r a c t t h e funds. There a r e now more $ 100,000 g i v e r s a t
the n a t i o n a l l e v e l t h a n t h e r e were a t t h e t i m e o f Watergate. n36
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n36 I d .
-Footnotes-
-End Footnotes13. P u b l i c f i n a n c i n g , o r matching funds, cannot cure these problems, so l o n g
as t h e i r use and compliance w i t h spending l i m i t s remains v o l u n t a r y . For one
t h i n g , as e x p e r i e n c e has shown, a c a n d i d a t e can s i m p l y r e j e c t t h e p r o f f e r e d
bargain, without serious r i s k o f r e j e c t i o n a t the p o l l s ; other factors usually
govern t h e v o t e r s ' s e l e c t i o n . n37
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- -
n3 7 See Common Cause, supra note 3 1 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
14. V o t e r s by and l a r g e have l o s t c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e matching-fund system.
Tax c h e c k - o f f s have d e c l i n e d a t b o t h t h e f e d e r a l and s t a t e l e v e l s . I n Michigan,
the d e c l i n e i s from 28.3 p e r [*143]
cent i n 1977 t o 11.1 p e r c e n t i n 1991.
n38 I n Wisconsin, t a x - f i l e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n d e c l i n e d from a h i g h o f n e a r l y t w e n t y
p e r c e n t i n 1979 t o 11.6 p e r c e n t i n 1991. n39
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�I LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
member of rhe Reed Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
"6<^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o f
t h c
Rccd Elsevier pit group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS*
" 6 L
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o t
t h c
R c c d
E'scvicr pk group
�Page 49
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *143
n38 Michigan Bureau o f E l e c t i o n s , S t a t e Campaign Fund Program (1993).
n39 Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e C o u n c i l , S t a f f Reports t o t h e S p e c i a l Committee on
Campaign F i n a n c i n g (19 93) .
-End
Footnotes-
15. The funds t h a t a r e g a t h e r e d t e n d t o be adequate f o r t h e needs o f
well-known incumbents b u t n o t o f unknown c h a l l e n g e r s . I n Wisconsin, t h e y a r e
used c h i e f l y by c a n d i d a t e s who a r e unopposed o r o t h e r w i s e do n o t need i t . I n
c o n t e s t e d races, b o t h c a n d i d a t e s f o r e g o p u b l i c funds and w i t h them a l l spending
l i m i t s . n40
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n40 I d .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(C) B e n e f i t s o f Mandatory L i m i t s
1. C o n t r a r y a g a i n t o t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s v o i c e d i n Buckley v. Valeo, t h a t
" v i r t u a l l y a l l m e a n i n g f u l p o l i t i c a l communications i n t h e modern s e t t i n g i n v o l v e
the e x p e n d i t u r e o f money," n41 t h e most i n s t r u c t i v e and most p e r s u a s i v e channels
of campaign d i s c o u r s e have t u r n e d o u t i n r e c e n t years t o be f r e e o r
i n e x p e n s i v e - - n o t a t a l l dominated by t h e power o f money.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n41 Bucklev,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes- -
11.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
2. I n t h e 1992 P r e s i d e n t i a l campaign, media a d v i s e r s t o b o t h major p a r t i e s
agreed t h a t i t was t h e f r e e p o l i t i c a l media t h a t dominated: i n t e r v i e w s , debates,
and c a l l - i n programs. By mid-June o f t h a t year, c a n d i d a t e C l i n t o n had so many
unpaid t a l k show o p p o r t u n i t i e s t h a t he canceled a scheduled h a l f - h o u r o f p a i d
t e l e v i s i o n t i m e . Toni C l a r k e , t h e Bush campaign's spokesman, e x p l a i n e d t h a t , on
i n t e r v i e w shows, t h e c a n d i d a t e g e t s t o develop h i s own ideas and emphases a t h i s
own pace, and t o t a l k t o v o t e r s o r h o s t s r a t h e r t h a n t o media t r i b u n e s . n42
- Footnotesn42 R i c h a r d Harwood, The Growing I r r e l e v a n c e o f J o u r n a l i s t s , Wash. Post, Oct.
23, 1992, a t A21; E l i z a b e t h K o l b e r t , W h i s t l e Stops a l a 1992: A r s e n i o , L a r r y and
P h i l , N.Y. Times, June 5, 1992, a t A18.
-End
Footnotes-
3. Tim Russert, t h e p r e s i d i n g t r i b u n e on NBC's Meet t h e Press, r e f l e c t e d
t h a t " t h e c a n d i d a t e s have decided t h a t t h e y p r e f e r t o communicate i n an
u n f i l t e r e d way." n43
�fp
m
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
' Q i j i member of thc Rccd Elsevier p k group
A
LEXIS-NEXIS"
LEXIS-NEXIS"
*
_f .u. • . . .
•^ j J ^ A member of lhc RccdJ Elsevier pk" group
^
^ ^ ^ ^ A member of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 50
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *143
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- -
n4 3 I d .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -End Footnotes-
4. A l s o s i g n i f i c a n t was t h e f u l l coverage o f speeches and events made
a v a i l a b l e by c a b l e and p u b l i c b r o a d c a s t i n g . One
[*144]
might f i n d l i t t l e b u t
sound b i t e s on network news, b u t t h e MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour showed t h e
c a n d i d a t e ' s e n t i r e s t a n d a r d stump speech. F u l l i n t e r v i e w s and speeches were a l s o
t e l e v i s e d r e g u l a r l y over C-SPAN and CNN. By midsummer o f 1992, these appearances
had become such a s t a p l e p a r t o f t h e p o l i t i c a l d i e t t h a t t h e New York Times t o o k
t o p u b l i s h i n g a d a i l y schedule. On F r i d a y , J u l y 24, f o r example, i t l i s t e d
P r e s i d e n t Bush a t 10 a.m. on t h e C h r i s t i a n B r o a d c a s t i n g Network (an i n t e r v i e w )
and a g a i n a t 5:30 p.m. on C-SPAN (a speech). The C l i n t o n - G o r e t i c k e t was
r e p r e s e n t e d t h a t day on C-SPAN a t 5 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. (speeches) and a g a i n a t
9:30 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. ( i n t e r v i e w s ) . n44
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n44 See Candidates
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
on T e l e v i s i o n , N.Y. Times, J u l y 24, 1992, a t A13.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
5. Something c a l l e d " P r o j e c t Vote Smart," i n Oregon, combining an "800"
number w i t h computer data banks, a l s o debuted i n 1992. Funded by memberships and
n o n - p r o f i t g r a n t s , i t o f f e r e d data on v o t i n g r e c o r d s , performance e v a l u a t i o n s ,
and c a n d i d a t e b i o g r a p h i e s - - a l l w i t h o u t c o s t t o campaigns o r t o v o t e r s . n45
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
n45 Center f o r N a t ' l Independence i n P o l i t i c s ,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
supra note 14.
- - - - - - - -
6. The f i r s t n a t i o n a l debate between t h e l e a d i n g p r e s i d e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e s
drew 75 p e r c e n t o f t h e t e l e v i s i o n audience, even though i t began a t 4 p.m.,
d u r i n g work hours, on t h e West Coast. Each debate drew p r o g r e s s i v e l y l a r g e r
audiences, r e a c h i n g 91 p e r c e n t f o r t h e t h i r d and f i n a l debate. n46 None o f t h e
debates c o s t t h e c a n d i d a t e s a n y t h i n g b u t p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n46 See F i n a l Debate Tops R a t i n g s , N.Y. Times, October 2 1 , 1992 a t A19.
-End
Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7. The expanded use o f f r e e and l o w - c o s t media, encouraged by t h e a d o p t i o n
o f reasonable spending l i m i t s , would t e n d t o enhance v o t e r c o n t a c t and
a c c o u n t a b i l i t y . These changes would s t i m u l a t e a movement away from s t u d i o
appearances and toward p u b l i c engagement--which i s b o t h l e s s expensive and more
p a r t i c i p a t o r y , hence more p r o d u c t i v e o f F i r s t Amendment speech and a s s o c i a t i o n .
n4 7
�-
LEXIS-NEXIS
LEXIS-NEXIS
LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
-^^A
8."
mcmbcr of rhe Reed F.lscvier pic group
mbcr of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 51
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n47 Developments i n t h e Law:
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
*144
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
E l e c t i o n s , 88 Harv. L. Rev.
llll,
1238
(1975).
-End Footnotes-
8. Seasoned campaign c o n s u l t a n t s , a n t i c i p a t i n g e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n , have
s a i d f o r t h e r e c o r d t h a t these s h o u l d s t i m u l a t e
[*145]
c r e a t i v e uses o f the
f r e e media. L i m i t s w i l l " ' d i m i n i s h t h e importance o f p a i d a d v e r t i s i n g ' and
f o s t e r ' i n n o v a t i v e ways o f communicating w i t h v o t e r s . ' " n48
- Footnotesn48 Mark S t e n c e l , Changing t h e Ways That P o l i t i c a l C o n s u l t a n t s Work, Wash.
Post, Feb. 8, 1993, a t F15 ( q u o t i n g Frank Greer, a Democratic media s t r a t e g i s t
and c o n s u l t a n t ) .
-End Footnotes9. The r e d u c t i o n o f campaign spending t o reasonable l e v e l s w i l l a l s o
encourage t h e emergence o f new, d i v e r s e , and q u i e t e r v o i c e s . As former S o l i c i t o r
General A r c h i b a l d Cox has w r i t t e n : "The amount o f money spent i n modern
campaigns . . . bears almost no r e l a t i o n t o t h e number o f i s s u e s d i s c u s s e d o r
the depth o f t h e i r e x p l o r a t i o n . . . .
The money buys c h i e f l y r e p e t i t i o n . " n49
-Footnotesn49 Archibald Cox, Constitutional Issues in the Regulation of the Financing
of Election Campaigns, 31 Clev. St. L. Rev. 395,
416. Compare Buckley
v.
Valeo,
424
U.S.
1,
19
(1976).
-End Footnotes10. The l a t e g r e a t dean o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law s c h o l a r s , Paul Freund,
l i k e w i s e a s s e r t e d t h a t "we are d e a l i n g here n o t so much w i t h t h e r i g h t o f
p e r s o n a l e x p r e s s i o n o r even a s s o c i a t i o n , b u t w i t h d o l l a r s and d e c i b e l s . " n50
B r i n g i n g down t h e n o i s e l e v e l w i l l be good f o r d e m o c r a t i c d i s c o u r s e .
- Footnotesn50 Paul A. Freund, Commentary, i n F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n o f Campaign Finance:
Some C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Questions 71 ( A l b e r t J. Rosenthal ed., 1972) .
-End Footnotes11. A modicum o f o r d e r i s i n any event necessary t o t h e e x e r c i s e o f
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i b e r t i e s . The town meeting, f o r example, r e q u i r e s a moderator t o
a p p l y r u l e s o f r e c o g n i t i o n and governance t o t h e p r o c e e d i n g s . I f everyone
grabbed f o r the microphone, t h e r e c o u l d be no meeting and no d i s c o u r s e . n51
- Footnotesn51 Alexander M e i k l e j o h n , P o l i t i c a l Freedom: The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Powers o f t h e
People 24-28 (1960). See a l s o Harry Kalvan, J r . , The Concept o f t h e P u b l i c
�Wk LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ J ^ A member of the Reed F.lscvier pk group
-
f i j LEXIS-NEXIS
• ^ J ^ A member of thc Reed Elsevier pk- group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
member of thc Rccd Klsevier pk group
�Page 52
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *145
Forum, 1965 Sup. Ct. Rev. 1. "In any theory, speech has always been dependent on
some commitment to order and etiquette." Id. at 23.
-End
Footnotes-
12. I n t h i s v e r y p r a c t i c a l sense, mandatory spending l i m i t s w i l l serve t o
enhance speech--as communication, r a t h e r t h a n noise--more t h a n t h e y d e t r a c t from
i t . They a r e l i k e t h e exchange r e g u l a t i o n s t h a t a l l o w f r e e s e c u r i t i e s markets t o
f u n c t i o n . n52
- Footnotesn52 Compare Harold Leventhal, Courts and Political Thickets, 77 Colum. L.
.Rev. 345 (1977) with Marlene Nicholson, Political Campaign Expenditure
Limitations and the Unconstitutional Condition Doctrine, 10 Hastings
Const.
L.Q.
601,
631-32
(1983).
-End
Footnotes-
[*146]
(D) Reasonableness o f Spending L i m i t s
1. To summarize, t h e r e i s good reason t o s u p p o r t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e
C a l i f o r n i a Commission on Campaign Financing--reached a f t e r e i g h t years o f
s e a r c h i n g i n q u i r y - - t h a t t h e p r e s e n t system o f u n l i m i t e d spending i s
" d e s t a b i l i z i n g and i n h e r e n t l y c o r r u p t i v e o f t h e democratic process." The
Commission b e l i e v e s i t " s t r o n g l y d e s i r a b l e t o p r e s e n t t h e [U.S. Supreme] Court
w i t h c a r e f u l l y researched data and arguments so t h a t i t can c o n s i d e r u p h o l d i n g
r e s p o n s i b l e l i m i t a t i o n s . " n53
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - n53 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , Democracy By I n i t i a t i v e 28
(1992)
-End
Footnotes-
2. Spending l i m i t s , t o be e f f e c t i v e , must be mandatory. To be reasonable,
t h e y must a l s o be s e l e c t e d w i t h care. Too low a spending l i m i t c o u l d f a i l t o l e t
c h a l l e n g e r s achieve t h e needed t h r e s h o l d o f v i s i b i l i t y . n54 Too h i g h a l e v e l , on
the o t h e r hand, would s i m p l y c o n t i n u e t h e p r e s e n t c l u t t e r .
- Footnotesn54 See H e r b e r t Alexander,
Reform 40 (1976).
F i n a n c i n g P o l i t i c s : Money, E l e c t i o n s and P o l i t i c a l
-End
Footnotes-
3. Spending l i m i t s do n o t , as some have m a i n t a i n e d , i n h e r e n t l y d i s c r i m i n a t e
a g a i n s t c h a l l e n g e r s . "Reasonable l i m i t s , " i n s t e a d , " w i l l a i d most c h a l l e n g e r s by
f o r c i n g economy on incumbents. C h a l l e n g e r s themselves, who do n o t o r d i n a r i l y
spend beyond most c e i l i n g s s e r i o u s l y proposed, w i l l be l a r g e l y u n a f f e c t e d . " n55
�) LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of lhc Rccd Elsevier pic group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
"6<^
A
member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS"
' 6 v
A
m c r T l b c r
o t
Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 53
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *146
- Footnotesn5 5 Jonathan Krasno & Donald P. Green, Stopping t h e Buck Here: The Case f o r
Campaign Spending L i m i t s , Brookings Rev., S p r i n g 1993, a t 17, 19.
-End
Footnotes-
4. To be reasonable, t h e e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s s h o u l d a p p l y no more w i d e l y t h a n
i s necessary. They s h o u l d l i m i t themselves t o e x p e n d i t u r e s by o r on b e h a l f o f a
candidacy f o r e l e c t i v e o f f i c e . They need n o t and s h o u l d n o t r e s t r a i n
independent, i s s u e - o r i e n t e d speech, o r communications w i t h i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n , o r
e x p r e s s i o n s o f e i t h e r f a c t o r o p i n i o n by t h e media. n56
- Footnotesn56 See Rod S. Fiori, Note, A Comparative Analysis of English and American
Campaign Finance Laws, 11 Hastings
Int'l
& Comp. L. Rev. 289, 293 & n.49
(1988).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
5. The p u b l i c ' s i n t e r e s t i n a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f i t s p o l i t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s i s
today b e i n g unreasonably t h w a r t e d by t h e u n i n t e n d e d e f f e c t s o f Buckley v.
Valeo. I n 1992, a mood o f v o t e r r e b e l l i o n was w i d e l y h e r a l d e d as p r e s a g i n g a
rejection of i n [*147]
cumbent o f f i c e - h o l d e r s . n57 I n f a c t , incumbents
r a i s e d and spent whatever was necessary t o h o l d on t o o f f i c e . I n t h e t i g h t e s t
races f o r t h e U.S. House o f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , where t h e margin o f v i c t o r y was
l e s s than 5 p e r c e n t , incumbents spent an average o f $ 788,000--an enormous
i n c r e a s e over t h e average o f $ 412,000 f o r a l l House races two years b e f o r e . n58
- Footnotesn57 The N a t i o n : A Surge o f Incumbents Opts Out, N.Y. Times, May 17, 1992,
s e c t i o n 4 (The Week i n Review), a t 5.
n58 Michael Wines, Candidates f o r Congress Spent Record $ 678 M i l l i o n , a 52%
Jump, N.Y. Times, March 5, 1993, a t A12.
-End
Footnotes-
6. Focus group surveys show t h a t m a j o r i t i e s r e a c h i n g up t o 90 p e r c e n t f a v o r
mandatory spending l i m i t s as t h e i r campaign f i n a n c e remedy o f c h o i c e . This
compares w i t h 68 p e r c e n t support f o r l e g i s l a t i v e term l i m i t s . E f f e c t i v e
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s , r e s t o r i n g p o p u l a r c o n t r o l over t h e a c t u a l l e n g t h o f a
p o l i t i c i a n ' s t e n u r e i n o f f i c e , would undercut t h e p e r c e i v e d n e c e s s i t y f o r
a r b i t r a r y term l i m i t s . n59
-Footnotesn59 Greenberg-Lake A s s o c i a t e s , Maine and Ohio p o l l s (1993) ; Center f o r Law i n
t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t , C a l i f o r n i a p o l l (1992) ; L o u i s v i l l e C o u r i e r - J o u r n a l ,
Kentucky p o l l (1991). N a t i o n a l F e d e r a t i o n o f Independent Business, n a t i o n w i d e
p o l l (1989) (copies on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
-End
Footnotes-
�fl
^ " ^ ^
LEXIS-NEXIS
. L
k
i" . k . D - . J
- t ^ ^^J AA member of thc Rccd C l
Elsevier pk group
n
fp
^ ^ ^ ^
LEXIS-NEXIS
I
f
I
I..
- ^ ^ Ak mcmbcr „of .1 D
rhe Rccd L'l
Klsevier pk group
. { L - J
A
^ " ^ ^
LEXIS-NEXIS*
k
I
l .
1..
- ^ ^t^ A — . — 1 „ 1 .1theD ReedE Elsevier pic group
member of
�Page 54
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 147
III.
LAW AND PRACTICE I N OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACIES
(A) Mandatory Spending
Limits
1. Among America's s i x a l l i e s i n t h e s o - c a l l e d Group o f 7 i n d u s t r i a l
democracies, f u l l y h a l f - - B r i t a i n , Canada, and France--impose mandatory spending
l i m i t s on p o l i t i c a l campaigns.
2. Others who have done so i n c l u d e Belgium, I s r a e l , New Zealand, and Spain.
n6 0
- Footnotesn60 Center f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s , P r e l i m i n a r y Study o f F o r e i g n E l e c t i o n
Systems (1992) (copy on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
-End Footnotes3. I n
ceilings;
days o f a
curtailed.
Canadian g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n s , f o r example, t h e r e are f i x e d spending
t h e purchase o f a d v e r t i s e m e n t s i s l i m i t e d t o t h e l a s t t w e n t y - e i g h t
campaign; and t h e purchase o f t i m e on t h e e l e c t r o n i c media i s s t r i c t l y
n61
- Footnotes-
n61 Khayyam Z. P a l t i e l , Canadian E l e c t i o n Expense L e g i s l a t i o n , 1963-85, i n
H e r b e r t Alexander, Comparative P o l i t i c a l Finance i n t h e 1980s 51, 66-68 (1989).
-End Footnotes[*148]
4. P a r l i a m e n t a r y e l e c t i o n s i n t h e U n i t e d Kingdom are c u r r e n t l y l i m i t e d t o
t h r e e weeks and are s u b j e c t t o r i g o r o u s spending l i m i t s : each c a n d i d a t e has a
$ 15,000 spending c e i l i n g ; and t e l e v i s i o n t i m e , a l l o t t e d t h r o u g h t h e p o l i t i c a l
p a r t i e s , cannot be purchased by c a n d i d a t e s . U n a u t h o r i z e d e l e c t i o n e x p e n d i t u r e s
by t h i r d p a r t i e s , i n t e n d e d t o promote t h e e l e c t i o n o f an i d e n t i f i a b l e c a n d i d a t e ,
are " c o r r u p t a c t s " s u b j e c t t o c r i m i n a l punishment. I t may sound t i g h t l y
c o n s t r a i n e d , b u t t h e average v o t e r t u r n o u t i n these e l e c t i o n s i s s e v e n t y - f i v e
p e r c e n t , h a l f a g a i n as h i g h as i n American p r e s i d e n t i a l c o n t e s t s . n62
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- - - -
n62 See F i o r i , supra n o t e 56, a t 291-93, 315-17.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes- - -
5. Of course t h e s o c i e t i e s and c u l t u r e s are d i f f e r e n t . There i s s t r o n g p a r t y
d i s c i p l i n e i n England, and a c o m p a r a t i v e l y homogeneous e l e c t o r a t e . Other
c o u n t r i e s t y p i c a l l y have no w r i t t e n B i l l o f R i g h t s , and no independent j u d i c i a l
review o f campaign laws f o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y . But t h e American p r a c t i c e on
these m a t t e r s , i n c l u d i n g Buckley v. Valeo, has become t h e b a s i s f o r an argument
elsewhere a g a i n s t a d o p t i n g a B i l l o f R i g h t s . "A p a r t i c u l a r l y d i s t u r b i n g
tendency," w r i t e s one commentator, "has been t h e u n w i l l i n g n e s s on t h e p a r t o f
�I LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A member of rhe Reed Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS
" ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
f p LEXIS-NEXIS
6 ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 55
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *148
t h e American c o u r t s t o s u s t a i n l e g i s l a t i o n i n t h e face o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
challenge, thereby f a c i l i t a t i n g the continued domination of the p o l i t i c a l
process by moneyed i n t e r e s t s . " n63
- Footnotesn63 K.D. Ewing, The Legal Regulation of Campaign Financing in American
Federal Elections, 47 Cambridge L.J.
370, 402
(1988).
-End Footnotes6. The p o i n t o f these comparative r e c i t a t i o n s i s n o t o f course t h a t t h e
U n i t e d S t a t e s must f e e l compelled t o move i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f any p a r t i c u l a r
f o r e i g n e x p e n d i t u r e - l i m i t model; m e r e l y t h a t i t can do so w i t h o u t d e p a r t i n g from
c i v i l i z e d norms.
(B) Impetus Toward Reform
1. A n t i c i p a t i n g domestic and i n t e r n a t i o n a l c r i t i c i s m o f e l e c t o r a l dominance
by i t s g o v e r n i n g p a r t y , Mexico, i n 1993, adopted r e f o r m l e g i s l a t i o n t o govern
the 1994 p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n s i n t h a t c o u n t r y . Under t h e new law, t h e F e d e r a l
E l e c t o r a l I n s t i t u t e was empowered t o f i x mandatory l i m i t s on campaign spending.
I n December o f 1993, t h e l i m i t was s e t a t $ 213 m i l l i o n f o r each c a n d i d a t e ,
which drew c r i t i c i s m because sums o f t h i s magnitude c o u l d o n l y come from
i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s behold[*149]
en o r hoping t o become beholden t o t h e
g o v e r n i n g p a r t y . The f o l l o w i n g month, a f t e r a r e b e l u p r i s i n g i n t h e s o u t h e r n
s t a t e o f Chiapas, t h e government s w i t c h e d d i r e c t i o n and agreed t o an e i g h t y
p e r c e n t r e d u c t i o n i n t h i s spending l e v e l , down t o $ 44 m i l l i o n . n64
-Footnotesn64 Damian Eraser, S a l i n a s Brushes Up Mexico's P o l l s Image, F i n . Times
(London), Sept. 22, 1993, a t 4; Tim Golden, Mexican P a r t i e s Agree t o Reforms:
Spurred by Peasant U p r i s i n g , Pact Vows E l e c t i o n L i m i t s , N.Y. Times, Jan. 28,
1994, a t A l , A4.
-End Footnotes2. I n 1993, t h e governments o f two f u r t h e r Group o f 7 member s t a t e s - - I t a l y
and Japan--were f o r c e d o u t o f o f f i c e f o r f a i l u r e t o c o r r e c t l o n g - s t a n d i n g
campaign f i n a n c e abuses. Reform governments were e l e c t e d on pledges, among o t h e r
t h i n g s , t o remedy these d e f e c t s . The I t a l i a n r e f o r m agenda as o f t h e end o f 1995
was n o t c l e a r . I n Japan, t h e r e f o r m c o a l i t i o n headed by Prime M i n i s t e r M o r i h i r o
Hosakawa managed t o push t h r o u g h a compromise b i l l b e f o r e Hosakawa h i m s e l f was
o b l i g e d t o r e s i g n . I t s main f e a t u r e s c a l l e d f o r c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s , f i n a n c i a l
d i s c l o s u r e , and e l e c t o r a l r e d i s t r i c t i n g - - a l l w i d e l y regarded t o be v a l u a b l e
measures. The a c t d i d n o t i n c l u d e mandatory spending l i m i t s . A r c h i t e c t s o f t h e
r e f o r m i n d i c a t e d , however, t h a t t h e i r p l a n was t o pass something t h e n and t o
s t r e n g t h e n i t l a t e r . n65
- Footnotesn65 James S t e r n g o l d , Japan's Leader Broadens H i s B a t t l e t o Win Reform,
Times, Jan. 28, 1994, a t A10.
N.Y.
�-
I LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd F.lscvier pic group
#4
1
LEXIS-NEXIS
1
c
l
D
J
C
l
- ^ - ^ A* mcmbcr of ' rhe Rccd F.lscvier - group
— "
— - ' pk
' ^^
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS"
^—^ A
-^^*
l
:
—
•>— •«
member of rhe Reed F.lscvier'- group
pk
�Page 56
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *149
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (IV)
-End F o o t n o t e s -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
STATE LAW AND PRACTICE
(A) Before Buckley v. Valeo
1. The s t a t e s have power t o r e g u l a t e t h e i r own e l e c t i o n s f o r s t a t e o f f i c e ,
s u b j e c t t o t h e a p p l i c a b l e r e s t r a i n t s o f t h e Federal B i l l o f R i g h t s . n66
- Footnotesn66 Oregon v. Mitchell,
Comm., 926 F.2d 573, 575
400 U.S. 112, 125 (1970);
Pestrak
v. Ohio
(6th Cir.), cert, dismissed, 502 U.S. 1022
-End
Elections
(1991).
Footnotes-
2. D u r i n g t h e Watergate p e r i o d (1973-1974), and b e f o r e t h e d e c i s i o n i n
Buckley, f u l l y f o u r - f i f t h s o f t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s enacted campaign f i n a n c e
r e f o r m s - - i n c l u d i n g t h i r t y - f o u r w i t h mandatory l i m i t s on e x p e n d i t u r e s . n6 7
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
n67 Developments i n t h e Law: E l e c t i o n s ,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
supra note 47, a t 1254 & n.122.
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
3. L i t t l e t i m e was a l l o w e d f o r experience w i t h them b e f o r e t h e Buckley
d e c i s i o n i n 1976.
[*150]
(B) Since Buckley v. Valeo
1. The N a t i o n a l M u n i c i p a l League's Model S t a t e Campaign Finance Law,
p u b l i s h e d i n 1979, accepted Buckley's p r o h i b i t i o n o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s , and
c o n t e n t e d i t s e l f - - a s d i d t h e s u r v i v i n g f e d e r a l l a w - - w i t h a regime o f f i n a n c i a l
d i s c l o s u r e . n68
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n68 N a t i o n a l M u n i c i p a l League, Model S t a t e Campaign Finance Law 38 (1979) .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2. By 1984, o n l y f i v e s t a t e s had r e i n t r o d u c e d e x p e n d i t u r e c e i l i n g s , each
v o l u n t a r y and t i e d t o p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g . n69
- Footnotesn69 California Comm. on Campaign Financing, supra note 12, at 12. For a
summary of current state laws, see Thomas P. Dvorak, Comment, State Campaign
Finance Law: An Overview and a Call For Reform, 55 Mo. L. Rev. 937,
962-70
(1990) .
-End
Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS/o » mcmbcr of thc Rccd :Elsevier
„
-^^A
D
JC
pk group
g § LEXIS-NEXIS"
^mw
SD
-^^A
k
_ , .
_ ,
member of ihe Rccd Elsevier pk group
L
�Page 57
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *150
3. The s t a t e s have been r e s t i v e w i t h t h e c o n s t r a i n t s on spending l i m i t s ,
e s p e c i a l l y as p u b l i c s u p p o r t f o r p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g has d w i n d l e d . n70 A s t a t u t o r y
r e t u r n t o mandatory spending l i m i t s was approved by t h e Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e
C o u n c i l i n 1993 w i t h t h e s u p p o r t o f t h a t s t a t e ' s A t t o r n e y General. n71
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n70 See Common Cause, Campaign Finance Reform i n t h e S t a t e s 14-16 (1985) .
n71 E l e c t i o n Reform Hearings B e f o r e t h e Wisconsin Assembly Comm. on
E l e c t i o n s , C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Law, and C o r r e c t i o n s 180 (1994) ( t e s t i m o n y o f Roland
Hornet).
-End Footnotes4. B a l l o t i n i t i a t i v e s t o t h e same e f f e c t a r e b e i n g developed i n o t h e r
s t a t e s , i n c l u d i n g C a l i f o r n i a and Oregon. n72
- Footnotesn72 Correspondence
author).
w i t h Oregon and C a l i f o r n i a r e f o r m l e a d e r s (on f i l e
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
with
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�^^^^^<TM
M
^^^^^S,™
f/0 LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
^^^^^i!
LEXIS-NEXIS"
"6<^
A
member of the Reed F.lscvier pk group
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS"
'6<^
A
m c m b c [
'
o t
'
t h c
R c e
d Elsevier pic group
�Page 58
1ST ITEM o f L e v e l 1 p r i n t e d i n FULL f o r m a t .
C o p y r i g h t (c) Oklahoma C i t y U n i v e r s i t y
OKLAHOMA CITY UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW
S p r i n g , 1996
21 Okla. C i t y U.L. Rev. 97
LENGTH: 24 73 3 words
ARTICLE: F a c t - F i n d i n g i n F i r s t Amendment L i t i g a t i o n : The Case o f Campaign
Finance Reform
Roland S. Hornet, J r . *
- Footnotes* The l a s t o f F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r ' s Supreme Court law c l e r k s , Roland Hornet has
h e l d assignments as w e l l i n t h e e x e c u t i v e and l e g i s l a t i v e branches o f t h e
n a t i o n a l government, i n c l u d i n g as c o n s u l t a n t t o t h e Senate J u d i c i a r y Committee.
The p r e s e n t essay i s an o u t g r o w t h o f a 1990 f e l l o w s h i p a t t h e Smithsonian
I n s t i t u t i o n ' s Woodrow Wilson Center, f o l l o w e d by a two-year g r a n t from t h e John
and Mary R. Markle Foundation, t o i n q u i r e i n t o f r e e speech and t h e v i t a l i t y o f
American democracy.
-End FootnotesTEXT:
[*97]
The a c u t e s t c o n t r o v e r s i e s which have come b e f o r e our Supreme Court, and
i n c r e a s i n g l y w i l l come, c l u s t e r around . . . t h e e t e r n a l c o n f l i c t between t h e
freedom o f t h e i n d i v i d u a l and h i s c o n t r o l by s o c i e t y . The s t u f f o f these
c o n t e s t s a r e f a c t s , and judgment upon f a c t s . Every tendency t o d e a l w i t h them
a b s t r a c t e d l y , t o f o r m u l a t e them i n terms o f s t e r i l e l e g a l q u e s t i o n s , i s bound t o
r e s u l t i n s t e r i l e conclusions unrelated t o a c t u a l i t i e s .
--Felix Frankfurter n l
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -Footnotes-
n l F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r , A Note on A d v i s o r y O p i n i o n s , 37 Harv. L . Rev.
1002-03 (1924) ( c i t a t i o n s o m i t t e d ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
1002,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
-
%k LEXIS-NEXIS
^
-r.i.. Rccd Elsevier pk group
- ^ ^ ^ A* member of the ...a TT,
^
LEXIS'-NEXIS'
•—
- ^ J ^ A* member of the Reed ™
Elsevier pk- group
�Page 59
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *97
The 103d Congress s t r u g g l e d f o r two years w i t h o u t managing t o redeem
P r e s i d e n t C l i n t o n ' s pledge o f a sweeping r e f o r m o f t h e n a t i o n ' s campaign f i n a n c e
laws--even though these laws a r e c r e d i t e d i n many q u a r t e r s w i t h h a v i n g t u r n e d
American c i t i z e n s i n t o c y n i c s and d i s b e l i e v e r s i n what t h e i r government does and
says. n2 While t h e r e i s d o u b t l e s s room f o r improvement a t
[*98]
b o t h ends o f
Pennsylvania Avenue, t h e c h i e f o b s t a c l e t o m e a n i n g f u l r e f o r m may be s a i d t o l i e
w i t h t h e t h i r d and supposedly l e a s t p o w e r f u l branch, t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme
Court.
-Footnotesn2 Jamin Raskin & John Bonifaz, Equal Protection and the Wealth Primary, 11
Yale L. & Pol'y Rev. 273, 332 (1993); Roland S. Hornet, Jr., Address at Richmond,
Virginia (Jan. 13, 1993) (notes on file with author); MacNeil-Lehrer NewsHour,
(PBS television broadcast, July 15, 1992) (interview with presidential candidate
Bill Clinton); See generally Kenneth J. Levit, Note, Campaign Finance Reform and
the Return of Buckley v. Valeo, 103 Yale L. J. 469
(1993).
-End FootnotesTwenty years e a r l i e r , s t i r r e d by t h e Watergate scandals, t h e Congress
adopted comprehensive campaign f i n a n c e r e g u l a t i o n s , i n c l u d i n g mandatory spending
l i m i t s . S h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r , i n an e x p e d i t e d p r o c e e d i n g c a l l e d Buckley v.
Valeo, n3 t h e Supreme Court s t r u c k down those l i m i t s on F i r s t Amendment grounds,
w i t h o u t any h e a r i n g i n t o t h e i r a c t u a l o p e r a t i o n o r e f f e c t . n4 The c o u n t r y has
been l a b o r i n g under t h a t d i s p e n s a t i o n ever s i n c e .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n3 424 U.S.
1 (1976) .
n4 Buckley,
424 U.S.
-Footnotes- -
at
143.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
The Court d i d r u l e i n Buckley, i n a random t e x t u a l f o o t n o t e , n5 t h a t
v o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s , t i e d t o p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g , c o u l d pass c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
muster; and t h e Congress has t r i e d e p i s o d i c a l l y s i n c e t h e n t o f o l l o w s u i t . The
problem has been t h a t v o l u n t a r y l i m i t s a r e e a s i l y sidestepped--on t o p o f which
the v o t e r s g i v e s i g n s o f r e q u i r i n g some improvement i n t h e p o l i t i c a l system
b e f o r e t h e y a r e p r e p a r e d t o spend money on i t . T h e i r remedy o f c h o i c e f o r t h i s
purpose i s mandatory spending l i m i t s . n6
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- -
n5 I d . a t 57 n.65.
n6 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a app. B., p a r t
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
II.D.6.
-End Footnotes-
The Court's a b s t r a c t pronouncements i n Buckley ought p r o p e r l y t o y i e l d t o
the c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f c o n c r e t e f a c t s showing t h e r e a l - w o r l d e f f e c t s o f l i m i t l e s s
spending on p o l i t i c a l campaigns and on t h e conduct o f o f f i c e . For t h e r e i s , as
�^^^^^^TM
^
^^^^^\™
LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
^
^^^^^^™
LEXIS-NEXIS'
' 6 <
A m
c
m
b
c
r
t h
of c Rccd Elsevier pk group
# i LEXIS-NEXIS'
~ 6 ^
Am c m b
c ' ' of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
�Page 60
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *98
the e x p e r i e n c e o f t h e p a s t t w e n t y years can show, no necessary correspondence
between money and speech; we may s a f e l y t u r n down t h e volume o f t h e former
w i t h o u t harm t o t h e l a t t e r . But t o g e t t o t h a t p o i n t , we w i l l need f i r s t t o push
past t h e h a b i t s and p r a c t i c e s o f mind t h a t have come--over t h e p a s t t h i r t y
years and more--to d i s c a r d c o n c r e t e f a c t s as a necessary element i n
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , and p a r t i c u l a r l y F i r s t Amendment, l i t i g a t i o n . We w i l l need t o
f i n d a way t o r e t u r n t h e domain o f f a c t s t o i t s former primacy i n such cases.
[*99]
OUTLINE
I.
Factlessness
A. A d v i s o r y Opinions
B. P r e c i p i t a t e Judgments
II.
Hazards
A. Erroneous
Decisions
B. D i s r e g a r d o f Precedent
C. P o l i t i c a l
Intrusion
D. R i g i d i t y o f Judgment
I I I . Correctives
A. Voiding
Bucklev
B. D i s r e g a r d i n g F a c t l e s s D e c i s i o n s
C. P r e s e n t i n g New Facts
D. Broadening the R a t i o n a l e
IV. Remedial
Process
A. L e g i s l a t i v e
Challenge
B. J u d i c i a l Argument
Appendices
A. Sample L e g i s l a t i o n
B. Specimen J u d i c i a l B r i e f
I.
FACTLESSNESS
A. A d v i s o r y Opinions
The Buckley d e c i s i o n , f o r one who r e t u r n s t o i t ,
reads more l i k e a
�I LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
" ^ ^ A member of rhe Rccd Elsevier pk group
f f i LEXIS-NEXIS"
"6<^
A
member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 61
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *99
s p e c u l a t i v e l a w t r e a t i s e t h a n a j u d i c i a l o p i n i o n . I t i s spread across 294 pages
of t h e U.S. Reports (424 U.S. 1-294), c o m p r i s i n g some 92 pages o f s t a t u t o r y t e x t
preceded by 143 pages o f "per curium" o p i n i o n and f o l l o w e d by a n o t h e r 59 pages
of c o n c u r r i n g and d i s s e n t i n g views. The p r e v a i l i n g o p i n i o n i s f u r t h e r adorned by
an a r r a y o f 178 t e x t u a l f o o t n o t e s - - e a c h q u a l i f y i n g , e x t e n d i n g , o r l i m i t i n g t h e
reach o f t h e a n a l y s i s . I t t a k e s t h e b e t t e r p a r t o f two days s i m p l y t o read,
diagram, and note t h e Court's c o n c l u s i o n s .
[*100]
Why was t h e Court so d i s c u r s i v e ? I n p a r t because Congress asked f o r , and t h e
Court s u p p l i e d , what was l i k e l y an u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n on t h e
v a l i d i t y o f a s t a t u t e t h a t was u n i l l u m i n e d by any c o n c r e t e s e t o f f a c t s . From
i t s e a r l i e s t t i m e s , t h e Supreme Court has h e l d t h a t i t has no power t o render
such advance, a b s t r a c t , o r a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n s . n7 I t c i t e d some o f these
d e c i s i o n s i n Buckley, as d i d t h e Court o f Appeals f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia
s i t t i n g en banc b e f o r e i t ; n8 y e t t h i s was a case where a l l seventeen judges,
murmuring t h e y never would, t h e y d i d . I t i s a t l e a s t h i g h l y q u e s t i o n a b l e whether
a d i f f e r e n t , more d i s c i p l i n e d Court, from e a r l i e r times o r from today, would
a l l o w i t s e l f t o hear o r adjudge such a case.
- Footnotesn7 See Paul M. Bator e t a l . , H a r t and Wechsler's The F e d e r a l Courts and t h e
Federal System 66 (3d ed. 1988) (documenting t h e Court's 1793 r e f u s a l t o g i v e an
a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n r e q u e s t e d by P r e s i d e n t George Washington).
n8 See Bucklev
v.
Valeo,
519 F.2d 821 (D.C. Cir.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
1975).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
T h i s was n o t j u s t a t e c h n i c a l d e f e c t . The e s s e n t i a l wisdom o f t h e Court's
h i s t o r i c a b s t e n t i o n from a d v i s o r y o p i n i o n s i s u n d e r l i n e d i n Buckley by t h e
s c h o l a s t i c u n r e a l i s m o f i t s f i n d i n g s . Nowhere i s t h i s more e v i d e n t o r more
p i v o t a l than i n the s e c t i o n o f the o p i n i o n i n v a l i d a t i n g expenditure l i m i t a t i o n s :
"A r e s t r i c t i o n on t h e amount o f money a person o r group can spend on p o l i t i c a l
communication . . . n e c e s s a r i l y reduces t h e q u a n t i t y o f e x p r e s s i o n by
r e s t r i c t i n g t h e number o f i s s u e s d i s c u s s e d , t h e depth o f t h e i r e x p l o r a t i o n , and
t h e s i z e o f t h e audience reached." n9 T h i s i s p a t e n t l y u n t r u e , as anyone can
t e s t i f y who has gone t h r o u g h an a c t u a l campaign e x p e r i e n c e , f o r example t h e
p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign o f 1988. There i s o n l y a f i n i t e number o f "read my l i p s "
and W i l l i e H o r t o n commercials nlO one can absorb b e f o r e r u n n i n g o u t o f depth and
b r e a d t h and d i v e r s i t y o f e x p r e s s i o n . Far from b e i n g i n s t r u c t i v e , l i m i t l e s s money
f o r endless ads has t h e documentable p r o p e n s i t y o f drowning d i s c o u r s e r a t h e r
than promoting i t .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
n9 B u c k l e v , 424 U.S. a t 19 (emphasis
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
added).
nlO The r e f e r e n c e i s t o t e l e v i s i o n commercials
1988 p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
u t i l i z e d by George Bush i n the
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
At l e a s t t h a t i s one o f i t s p r o p e n s i t i e s . The s t r i k i n g t h i n g about t h e
�LEXB-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS"
I
r L- D
i r-i
• _ _t.
" ^ ^ ^ A1 member of .thc Reed Elsevier pic group
# i LEXIS-NEXIS"
^ " ^ ^
i
ri
i r-i
:
- # ^ A A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
^J
�Page 62
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *100
Buckley d e c i s i o n i s t h a t i t undertook t o pronounce on q u e s t i o n s t h a t were n o t
d e f i n e d by any evidence. I f i t were
[*101]
t r u e t h a t a law d u l y passed by
Congress c o u l d o n l y have m a l i g n a n t e f f e c t s ( " n e c e s s a r i l y r e s t r i c t s " ) , t h e n i n
those e x t r a o r d i n a r y circumstances i t might be a p p r o p r i a t e t o r u l e t h e law
i n v a l i d i n advance o f e x p e r i e n c e w i t h i t s a p p l i c a t i o n . But s u r e l y t h e Court
s h o u l d be slow t o adopt such a c o n c l u s i o n . I n o t h e r p a r t s o f i t s Buckley
o p i n i o n , f o r example, u p h o l d i n g c o n t r i b u t i o n d i s c l o s u r e r e q u i r e m e n t s d e s p i t e
c l a i m s o f adverse e f f e c t s on m i n o r i t y and unpopular causes, t h e Court was
w i l l i n g t o d e f e r judgment u n t i l t h e r e were a c t u a l i n s t a n c e s o f i n j u r y , n i l
L i k e w i s e , t h e Court o f Appeals d e c l i n e d t o make a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l judgment on
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s u n t i l t h e i r e f f e c t s on F i r s t Amendment freedoms had been
d e f i n e d by evidence. n l 2 There i s an i n e s c a p a b l e element o f a r b i t r a r i n e s s ,
indeed o f j u d i c i a l w i l l f u l n e s s , i n t h e Supreme Court's f a i l u r e t o f o l l o w t h a t
standard.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nil Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
74.
n l 2 B u c k l e y v . Valeo, 519 F.2d 821, 897-98 (D.C. C i r .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
1975).
- - - - - - - -
I n Bucklev, t h e m a j o r i t y chose t o decide t h e v a l i d i t y o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s
"on t h e i r f a c e , " u s i n g a s t a n d a r d o f " e x a c t i n g s c r u t i n y . " n l 3 But i n t h e absence
o f any f a c t s w i t h which t o conduct t h a t s c r u t i n y , t h e m a j o r i t y p u t t h e burden o f
p e r s u a s i o n o f t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f t h e law on i t s d e f e n d e r s - - c o n t r a r y t o t h e
s e t t l e d p r a c t i c e o f s o - c a l l e d " c o n s e r v a t i v e " a d j u d i c a t i o n as p r a c t i c e d , f o r
example, i n t h e 1950s by t h e Court m a j o r i t y t h e n headed by J u s t i c e s F r a n k f u r t e r
and H a r l a n . F r a n k f u r t e r used t o t e l l h i s law c l e r k s t h a t i t s h o u l d h u r t t o
d e c l a r e a law o f Congress u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l , and he went t o g r e a t l e n g t h s on
o c c a s i o n (as i n t h e Communist P a r t y cases) t o f i n d some b a s i s on which t h e
judgment o f Congress c o u l d be s u s t a i n e d .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl3 Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes- -
1.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
I f , as some o b s e r v e r s m a i n t a i n , a new c o n s e r v a t i v e m a j o r i t y i s emerging i n
today's Court on t h e F r a n k f u r t e r - H a r l a n model, n l 4 i t i s n o t unreasonable t o
expect t h a t i t w i l l d e c l i n e t o p l a y f a s t and loose w i t h c o n g r e s s i o n a l judgment
as t h e Buckley Court d i d .
- Footnotesn l 4 T h i s i s t h e view t a k e n , f o r example, by t h e New York Times' Supreme Court
correspondent Linda Greenhouse. See, e.g., Linda Greenhouse, Moderates on Court
Defy P r e d i c t i o n s , N.Y. Times, J u l y 5, 1992, s e c t i o n 6, a t 1.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Of course, Congress was p l a y i n g b o t h f a s t and l o o s e i t s e l f w i t h t h e 1974
�I LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr of ihe Rccd Elsevier pic group
#^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
rnembcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS"
~ 6 ^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o t
, h c
R c c d
Elsevier pk group
�Page 63
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *101
campaign law a t i s s u e i n t h e Buckley case. T h i s
[*102]
was p a r t o f a
Watergate r e f o r m package t o which, q u i t e p r o b a b l y , t o o l i t t l e seasoned t h o u g h t
had been g i v e n . n l 5 The Congress a c c o r d i n g l y p l a c e d a s p e c i a l v a l i d a t i n g
r e s p o n s i b i l i t y on t h e Court, a s k i n g f o r e x p e d i t e d c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c l e a r a n c e i n
advance o f t h e 1976 p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign then b e g i n n i n g t o t a k e shape. n l 6
"Congress was u n d e r s t a n d a b l y most concerned," t h e Court s a i d , " w i t h o b t a i n i n g a
f i n a l a d j u d i c a t i o n o f as many i s s u e s as p o s s i b l e . " n l 7 And so i t v e s t e d t h e
Court w i t h w i d e - r a n g i n g j u r i s d i c t i o n - - w h i c h , however, t h e Court was n o t o b l i g e d
t o accept and s h o u l d more p r o p e r l y have r e f u s e d on c o n s t i t u t i o n a l grounds g o i n g
back t o Marbury v. Madison. n l 8
- Footnotesn l 5 See Ralph K. Winter, J r . , Watergate and t h e Law 50-52 (1974)
problems w i t h any l e g i s l a t i v e a t t e m p t a t c u r b i n g " d i r t y t r i c k s " ) .
(noting
n l 6 S. Rep. No. 93-689, 93d Cong., 2nd Sess. (1974), r e p r i n t e d i n 1974
U.S.C.C.A.N. 5587, 5604-05.
nl7 Buckley,
nl8 5 U.S.
424 U.S. at
(1 Cranch)
117.
137
(1803).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The s u i t t h a t became Buckley v. Valeo was f i l e d on January 2, 1975, n l 9 t h e
f i r s t business day a f t e r t h e Federal E l e c t i o n Campaign A c t Amendments o f 1974
n20 went i n t o e f f e c t . No a c t i o n o f any s o r t had been t a k e n under o r i n pursuance
of t h e s t a t u t e , n o r had any i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f t h e law been i s s u e d by t h e newly
c r e a t e d F e d e r a l E l e c t i o n Commission. No e v i d e n t i a r y h e a r i n g was h e l d ; i n s t e a d ,
t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e s u i t made " o f f e r s o f p r o o f , " accompanied by proposed f i n d i n g s
o f f a c t which were n e g o t i a t e d o u t among themselves and t h e n adopted by t h e
Court. n 2 l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl9 BucJcley v. Valeo, 519 F.2d 821, 901 (D. C. Cir.
1975).
n20 Federal Election Campaign Act Amendments of 1974, 88 Stat. 1263 (1974)
(reproduced in extenso in BucJcley, 424 U.S. at
144-235).
n21 Buckley,
519 F.2d at
902.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Somewhere i n t h i s process, t h e government's motion t o d i s m i s s t h e a c t i o n ,
because i t was premature and r a i s e d n o n j u s t i c i a b l e i s s u e s , was l o s t . n22 The
case d r i f t e d away from b e i n g a l a w s u i t and took on t h e c h a r a c t e r o f a
f r e e - f o r - a l l p o l i t i c a l debate. n23
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n22 Id. at 901.
-Footnotes-
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Kccd F.lscvier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
" ^ j ^ A member of the Reed Flsevier pk' group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
' ^ 5 ^ ^ member of the Rccd F.lscvier pic group
�Page 64
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *102
n23 The Court went t h r o u g h t h e motions o f f i n d i n g an A r t i c l e I I I c o n t r o v e r s y ,
but i t s o p i n i o n on t h e p o i n t was c u r s o r y and n o t i n keeping w i t h t h e r e c o r d .
B u c k l e v , 424 U.S. a t 11-12 4 n . l l .
-End
Footnotes-
S e c t i o n 315(a) o f t h e 1974 s t a t u t e n24 was p a r t l y r e s p o n s i b l e f o r t h i s s t a t e
of a f f a i r s . I t p r o v i d e d t h a t t h e " n a t i o n a l committee
[*103]
o f any
p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , o r any i n d i v i d u a l e l i g i b l e t o v o t e [may b r i n g s u i t ] t o c o n s t r u e
the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f any p r o v i s i o n o f t h i s A c t . " Those who e n t e r e d t h e s u i t ,
i n consequence--not as f r i e n d s o f t h e c o u r t b u t as p a r t i e s - - r e a d l i k e a r o s t e r
of d e b a t i n g s o c i e t i e s . They i n c l u d e d one t h i r d - p a r t y s i t t i n g s e n a t o r , James
Buckley; one former senator and p e r i o d i c p r e s i d e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e , Eugene
McCarthy; and d i v e r s e c a u s e - o r i e n t e d groups l i k e t h e American C o n s e r v a t i v e
Union, t h e New York C i v i l L i b e r t i e s Union, Human Events I n c . , Common Cause, and
the League o f Women V o t e r s . n25 None o f them had i n any way been a f f e c t e d
c o n c r e t e l y by t h e s t a t u t e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n24 2 U.S.C.
section
n25 Bucklev,
424 U.S. at 7-8,
-Footnotes- -
437(h) (Supp. IV, 1974).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
9
n.5.
-End Footnotes-
Together t h i s assembly managed t o n e g o t i a t e f o r j u d i c i a l c o n s i d e r a t i o n
t w e n t y - e i g h t " c e r t i f i e d q u e s t i o n s " o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law, n26 which f u r n i s h e d
the bases f o r d e c i s i o n by t h e seventeen judges who t o o k p a r t i n t h e review. n27
A t y p i c a l q u e s t i o n was number t h r e e , which read as f o l l o w s : "Does any s t a t u t o r y
l i m i t a t i o n [on c o n t r i b u t i o n s o r e x p e n d i t u r e s ] v i o l a t e . . . t h e F i r s t , F i f t h , o r
N i n t h Amendment . . . o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s ? " n28 I t i s hard
t o t h i n k o f a more nakedly a b s t r a c t p r o p o s i t i o n o f law.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n26 Bucklev,
519 F.2d at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
898-901.
n2 7 The Supreme Court j u s t i c e s who p a r t i c i p a t e d i n c l u d e d C h i e f J u s t i c e Burger
and J u s t i c e s Brennan, Stewart, Powell, M a r s h a l l , Blackmun, Rehnquist, and White.
The judges o f t h e Court o f Appeals f o r t h e D i s t r i c t o f Columbia were Chief Judge
Bazelon and C i r c u i t Judges W r i g h t , McGowan, Tamm, L e v e n t h a l , Robinson, McKinnon,
and W i l k e r .
n28 Buckley,
519 F.2d at
898.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
That i s t h e k i n d o f p r o p o s i t i o n t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t s were designed,
h i s t o r i c a l l y , t o r e f u s e t o e n t e r t a i n . I n 1793, as i s w e l l known, t h e J u s t i c e s o f
t h e Supreme Court (which then had l i t t l e t o occupy i t ) unanimously d e c l i n e d t o
g i v e advice t o P r e s i d e n t Washington on a s e r i e s o f t w e n t y - n i n e q u e s t i o n s
propounded t o them by h i s S e c r e t a r y o f S t a t e , Thomas J e f f e r s o n , p e r t a i n i n g t o
t h e i n t e r n a t i o n a l law o f warship e n t r y and conduct. n29 T h i s was a t a t i m e o f
�fp
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of rhe Rccd Elsevier pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS
LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
member of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
�Page 65
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *103
a c t i v e Anglo-French n a v a l w a r f a r e , and i t would have been c o n v e n i e n t f o r t h e
f l e d g l i n g American n a t i o n t o know how t o s t a y o u t o f t r o u b l e w i t h these two
major powers. But t h e J u s t i c e s d e c l i n e d t o p r o v i d e t h e r e [*104]
quested
counsel, n o t i n g t h a t t h e y were "judges o f a c o u r t o f l a s t r e s o r t " and a check on
the o t h e r two branches o f government.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotesn29 Bator e t a l . , supra note 7, a t 66.
-End
Footnotes-
F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r ' s s c h o l a r - p a r t n e r Henry H a r t o f t h e Harvard Law School
l i k e d t o point t o t h i s decision f o r the teaching that the j u d i c i a l function i s
one o f a u t h o r i t a t i v e a p p l i c a t i o n o f g e n e r a l p r o p o s i t i o n s t o p a r t i c u l a r
circumstances. The f e d e r a l c o u r t s , i n h i s memorable phrase, a r e "organs o f sober
second t h o u g h t , " n o t f r o n t - l i n e a d v i s o r s . They s h o u l d c o n c e n t r a t e t h e i r t h i n k i n g
on s p e c i f i c and c o n c r e t e s e t s o f f a c t s t o l i m i t and focus t h e i r l e g a l
d e t e r m i n a t i o n s , and r e f r a i n from t h e chancy d i s p e r s i o n o f t h o u g h t e n t a i l e d i n
t r y i n g t o a n t i c i p a t e m u l t i p l e p o t e n t i a l i t i e s . T h i s r e s t r a i n t i s indeed e s s e n t i a l
t o t h e l e g i t i m a c y and acceptance o f j u d i c i a l i n t e r f e r e n c e i n d e m o c r a t i c
d e c i s i o n m a k i n g , as summed up i n t h e l i m i t a t i o n o f t h e f e d e r a l j u d i c i a l power t o
genuine "Cases and C o n t r o v e r s i e s . " n30
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n30 U.S. Const., a r t . I l l ;
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
see Bator e t a l . , supra note 7, a t 67-68.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e Supreme Court has u n t i l r e c e n t l y r e f u s e d t o e n t e r t a i n
a b s t r a c t , h y p o t h e t i c a l , o r c o n j e c t u r a l q u e s t i o n s - - e v e n when Congress has t h r u s t
the o c c a s i o n upon them. I n Muskrat v. U n i t e d S t a t e s , n31 a l e a d i n g a u t h o r i t y on
the p o i n t , Congress a u t h o r i z e d a s u i t i n an I n d i a n - p r o p e r t y m a t t e r " t o determine
the v a l i d i t y o f c e r t a i n a c t s o f Congress." n32 The Supreme Court h e l d t h e a c t i o n
t o be n o n j u s t i c i a b l e , t h a t i s , beyond i t s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l power, s i n c e t h e s u i t
was a u t h o r i z e d n o t t o s e t t l e i n d i v i d u a l c l a i m s b u t t o s e t t l e t h e s t a t u s o f
l e g i s l a t i o n . n33
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n31 219
U.S.
n32 Id. at
n33 Id. at
346
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
(1911).
348.
362-63.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - -
The p a r a l l e l w i t h Buckley v. Valeo s h o u l d be e v i d e n t . n34
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
the
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
n34 Compare t h e language i n t h e 1974 s t a t u t e , a u t h o r i z i n g s u i t " t o c o n s t r u e
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f . . . t h i s A c t . " Federal E l e c t i o n Campaign A c t
�^^^^^^"M
^
^^^^^S,™
LEXIS-NEXIS"
•^^A
mcmbcr of rhe Rccd F.lscvier pk group
^^^^^^TM
LEXIS-NEXIS"
" 6 ^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o f
l h
c R « d Elsevier pk group
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS"
' ^ ^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o t
'
Rccd F.lscvier pk group
�Page 66
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 104
Amendments o f 1974, s e c t i o n 3 1 5 ( a ) , 88 S t a t . 1263, 1285 (1974).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B. P r e c i p i t a t e Judgments
Even when the Court has the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l power to hear a case, i t r e t a i n s
the d i s c r e t i o n not to decide premature or h y p o t h e t i c a l questions. Over the
years, a whole panoply of j u d i c i a l - r e s t r a i n t instruments has been developed f o r
t h i s pur[*105]
p o s e - - c e r t i o r a r i ( s t a t u t o r y d i s c r e t i o n ) , to begin with--but
beyond that, such judge-made d o c t r i n e s as "standing," "ripeness," and " p o l i t i c a l
questions." n35 Any one of these could have been used to d e c l i n e to adjudicate
Buckley v. Valeo.
- Footnotesn35 See generally Alexander M. Bickel, The Passive Virtues, 75 Harv. L.
40
(1961)
Rev.
.
-End
Footnotes-
I n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. UAW, n36 --a case s t r i k i n g l y on p o i n t - - J u s t i c e
F r a n k f u r t e r f o r t h e Court d e c l i n e d a c h a l l e n g e t o t h e v a l i d i t y o f a campaign
f i n a n c i n g law b a r r i n g c o r p o r a t e and l a b o r u n i o n e l e c t i o n e x p e n d i t u r e s . A u n i o n
o f f i c i a l was charged w i t h u s i n g u n i o n dues t o sponsor campaign advocacy on
t e l e v i s i o n . The law a t i s s u e was s a i d t o be i n v a l i d "on i t s f a c e , " as an
i n v a s i o n o f f r e e speech. F r a n k f u r t e r r e f u s e d t o pass on t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
i s s u e , n o t i n g t h a t t h e r e were no f a c t s i n t h e r e c o r d and t h a t on t r i a l t h e i s s u e
might go away. ( I n f a c t t h e o f f i c i a l was a c q u i t t e d and t h e argument
disappeared.) The o p i n i o n compared t h i s case t o t h e Dred S c o t t d e c i s i o n , n37 a
s e l f - i n f l i c t e d j u d i c i a l wound i n which t h e Court had d e c i d e d a c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
q u e s t i o n i t d i d n o t have t o reach.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n36 352
U.S.
n37 Scott
567
-Footnotes- - - - - -
(1957).
v. Sandford,
60
U.S.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(19
How.)
393
(1857).
-End Footnotes- - - - -
S i m i l a r l y i n U n i t e d S t a t e s C i v i l S e r v i c e Commission v. N a t i o n a l A s s o c i a t i o n
of L e t t e r C a r r i e r s , n38 J u s t i c e White f o r a d i v i d e d Court r e f u s e d a c h a l l e n g e t o
the f a c i a l v a l i d i t y o f Hatch A c t p r o v i s i o n s p r o h i b i t i n g f e d e r a l employee
endorsements o f p a r t i s a n c a n d i d a t e s i n b r o a d c a s t s , l i t e r a t u r e , o r a t p o l i t i c a l
p a r t y meetings. White's o p i n i o n s t a t e d : "As we see i t , o u r t a s k i s n o t t o
d e s t r o y t h e A c t i f we can, b u t t o c o n s t r u e i t , i f c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e w i l l o f
Congress, so as t o comport w i t h c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n s . " n39
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n38 413 U.S. 54S
n39 I d . a t 571.
(1973;.
-Footnotes-
�-
I LEXIS-NEXIS
* 3
I
i . L
I
l
-/^ ^ ^ A1 mcmbcr of - thc- BRccd f b
Elsevier pic group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS"
/
O
»
,
r.
1^1
• ^ J ^ A member of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 67
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *105
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Again, t h e c o n t r a s t w i t h Buckley v. Valeo s h o u l d be p l a i n .
J u s t i c e White's s e n s i t i v i t y t o Congress reappeared
Buckley t o t h e i n v a l i d a t i o n o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s :
i n his dissent i n
The Court s t r i k e s down t h e p r o v i s i o n , s t r a n g e l y enough c l a i m i n g more i n s i g h t
as t o what may i m p r o p e r l y i n f l u e n c e candidates than i s possessed by t h e m a j o r i t y
of Congress t h a t passed t h i s b i l l and t h e P r e s i d e n t
[*106]
t h a t s i g n e d i t . Those s u p p o r t i n g t h e b i l l u n d e n i a b l y i n c l u d e d many seasoned
p r o f e s s i o n a l s who have been deeply i n v o l v e d i n e l e c t i v e processes and who have
viewed them a t c l o s e range over many years . . . . I would t a k e t h e word o f
those who know . . . . n40
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n40 Bucklev,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes- -
261.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
P a r t i c u l a r l y was t h i s so s i n c e t h e Court had no f a c t u a l b a s i s on which t o
gainsay Congress' judgment. "The r e c o r d b e f o r e us," s a i d J u s t i c e White, "no more
supports t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t t h e communicative e f f o r t s o f c o n g r e s s i o n a l and
p r e s i d e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e s w i l l be c r i p p l e d by t h e e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n s than i t
supports t h e c o n t r a r y . " n41
- Footnotesn41 Id. at 263.
-End
Footnotes-
I n f a c t , t h e committees t h a t f a s h i o n e d t h e e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n s had been
at p a i n s t o do so c o n s i s t e n t l y w i t h t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . n42 The Senate r e p o r t on
the s t a t u t e showed b i p a r t i s a n support f o r those l i m i t a t i o n s , which t h e Committee
found t o be "both necessary and c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . " n43 A d m i t t e d l y t h e r e were
" F i r s t Amendment i s s u e s . " n44 But t o l i m i t c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i t h o u t a l s o l i m i t i n g
e x p e n d i t u r e s would be t o a l l o w i n d i r e c t l y what was p r o h i b i t e d d i r e c t l y . "Your
Committee does n o t b e l i e v e t h e F i r s t Amendment r e q u i r e s such a wooden
c o n s t r u c t i o n . " n45
-Footnotesn42 S. Rep. No. 93-689, 93d Cong., 2nd Sess. (1974), r e p r i n t e d i n 1974
U.S.C.C.A.N. 5587, 5604-05.
n43
I d . a t 5604.
�§|> LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ J ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Klsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS"
o
.... »
• ^ ^ ^ A member of thc Rccd Klsevier pk group
| | j LEXIS-NEXIS"
/o .
u........ . ,,-,
- ^ ^ ^ A member of thc nRccd Klsevier pk group
�Page 68
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *106
n44 See i d . a t 5604-05.
n45 I d . a t 5605.
-End
Footnotes-
Such a judgment may be a r g u a b l e , b u t i t i s a t l e a s t e n t i t l e d t o r e s p e c t , and
under t r a d i t i o n a l j u d i c i a l d o c t r i n e s i t would have r e c e i v e d i t . J u s t i c e
Powell, who r e g r e t t a b l y missed t h i s p o i n t i n Bucklev, was e l o q u e n t about i t on
o t h e r occasions. I n U n i t e d S t a t e s v. Richardson, n46 w h i l e c o n c u r r i n g i n a
d e n i a l o f c i t i z e n s t a n d i n g t o c h a l l e n g e t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f CIA b u d g e t i n g
p r a c t i c e s , Powell observed:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n46 418
U.S.
166
-Footnotes- -
(1974).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
Repeated and e s s e n t i a l l y head-on c o n f r o n t a t i o n s between t h e l i f e - t e n u r e d
branch and t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e branches o f government w i l l n o t , i n t h e l o n g r u n ,
be b e n e f i c i a l t o e i t h e r . The p u b l i c c o n f i d e n c e e s s e n t i a l t o
[*107]
the former and t h e v i t a l i t y c r i t i c a l t o t h e l a t t e r may w e l l erode i f we do
not e x e r c i s e s e l f - r e s t r a i n t i n t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f o u r power t o n e g a t i v e t h e
a c t i o n s o f t h e o t h e r branches. n47
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n47 I d . a t 188
-Footnotes- -
( P o w e l l , J., c o n c u r r i n g ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
T h i s i s t h e language o f a u t h e n t i c j u d i c i a l c o n s e r v a t i s m , o f which J u s t i c e
Powell t o o i s a model f i g u r e . I f t h e c u r r e n t Court i s indeed choosing t o move i n
t h a t d i r e c t i o n , i t w i l l be moving away from t h e Buckley d e c i s i o n .
Another s t a l w a r t o f a u t h e n t i c j u d i c i a l c o n s e r v a t i s m was J u s t i c e Robert
Jackson, who a l s o served as A t t o r n e y General and S o l i c i t o r General under
P r e s i d e n t Roosevelt. H i s landmark book, The S t r u g g l e f o r J u d i c i a l Supremacy, n48
d e s c r i b e d t h e d i s t o r t i o n s t o t h e democratic system t h a t occur when t h e f e d e r a l
c o u r t s , and p a r t i c u l a r l y t h e Supreme Court, o v e r s t e p t h e i r bounds.
" C o n s t i t u t i o n a l l a w s u i t s , " he warned, "are t h e s t u f f o f power p o l i t i c s i n
America. Such p r o c e e d i n g s , " which he judged i l l - s u i t e d t o d e v i s i n g g e n e r a l r u l e s
of s o c i a l p o l i c y , "may f o r a g e n e r a t i o n o r more d e p r i v e an e l e c t e d Congress o f
power." n49 But e v e n t u a l l y t h e r e w i l l come a r e a c t i o n , perhaps an e x p l o s i v e one
l i k e P r e s i d e n t F r a n k l i n Roosevelt's C o u r t - p a c k i n g p l a n o f 1937, t o r e e s t a b l i s h a
working balance between "the p r i n c i p l e s o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e government and t h e
opposing p r i n c i p l e o f j u d i c i a l a u t h o r i t y . " n50
�LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^5^A
member ot' the Reed Elsevier pk group
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
member of ihe Reed F.lsevi r pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 69
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *107
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
n48
Robert H. Jackson, The S t r u g g l e f o r J u d i c i a l Supremacy (1941) .
n49
I d . a t 287.
n50
Id. at v i .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
The r e c o v e r y o f t h a t balance i s among t h e e s s e n t i a l v a l u e s a t s t a k e i n t h e
needed r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f Buckley v. Valeo.
II.
Hazards
The Supreme Court i n Bucklev may have been drawn o u t o f balance by i t s
s e l f - i n v e n t e d p r a c t i c e o f d e c i d i n g F i r s t Amendment c h a l l e n g e s "on t h e i r f a c e , "
i n advance o f a p p l i c a t i o n , w i t h o u t t h e b e n e f i t o f c l a r i f y i n g f a c t s . n51 As t h e
Court e x p l a i n e d i n Bigelow v. V i r g i n i a , n52 i t s d o c t r i n e o f " f a c i a l o v e r b r e a d t h "
i n v i t e s a p r i v a t e p a r t y t o a c t as a k i n d o f p u b l i c o f f i c i a l empow[*108]
ered t o c h a l l e n g e r e g u l a t o r y p r o v i s i o n s t h a t might t h r e a t e n o t h e r s w i t h t h e l o s s
of F i r s t Amendment freedoms. n53 I t i s enough, f o r t h i s purpose, t o show t h a t
the law i n q u e s t i o n might o p e r a t e u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l y i n unknown f u t u r e
a p p l i c a t i o n s . n54
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n51
See B u c k l e y ,
n52
421 U . S .
n53
U.S.
at
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I d . a t 815-18.
809
424
-Footnotes30-31.
(1975).
n54 I n o t h e r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l s e t t i n g s , f o r example, a f a i r t r i a l , t h i s i s n o t
a l l o w e d . "We have n o t r e c o g n i z e d an 'overbreadth' d o c t r i n e o u t s i d e t h e l i m i t e d
c o n t e x t o f t h e F i r s t Amendment." U n i t e d S t a t e s v .
(1987)
Salerno,
481 U . S .
739,
745
( B a i l Reform A c t ) .
-End
Footnotes-
What t h i s means i n p r a c t i c e i s t h a t t h e l i t i g a n t b e f o r e t h e Court i s
t y p i c a l l y w i t h o u t f a c t s capable o f showing t h e a c t u a l impact o f a r e g u l a t i o n on
somebody e l s e ' s f u t u r e freedom. "The c l a i m t h a t a s t a t u t e i s bad on i t s face
because overbroad does n o t t u r n on t h e e v a l u a t i o n o f t h e f a c t u a l data g e n e r a t e d
by a p a r t i c u l a r a p p l i c a t i o n . " n55 The j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r t h i s d e p a r t u r e has been
t h a t F i r s t Amendment freedoms a r e f r a g i l e and r e q u i r e v i g i l a n c e , l e s t some
f u t u r e e x p r e s s i o n be " c h i l l e d " o r i n t i m i d a t e d and t h e r e b y w i t h h e l d . n56
- Footnotesn55 Note, The First Amendment Overbreadth Doctrine, 83 Harv.
(1970)
.
L. Rev.
844,
863
�LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
m
LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
9
LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ J ^ A member of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 70
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *108
n56
See g e n e r a l l y Henry P. Monaghan, Overbreadth, 1981 Sup. C t . Rev. 1 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
T h i s s o l i c i t u d e , w h i l e a p p e a l i n g , i g n o r e s t h e r e a l i t y - - o f t e n c i t e d by
J u s t i c e F r a n k f u r t e r i n c o n v e r s a t i o n - - t h a t F i r s t Amendment p r o t a g o n i s t s t e n d t o
be w e l l - h e e l e d media and p o l i t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s t h a t a r e e n t i r e l y capable o f
l o o k i n g a f t e r t h e i r own a f f a i r s . ( F o u r t h Amendment p a r t i e s , by c o n t r a s t , those
who might have t h e i r doors beaten down a t t h r e e i n t h e morning, F r a n k f u r t e r
t h o u g h t g e n e r a l l y d e s e r v i n g o f a j u d i c i a l champion, which he proposed t o be.)
The problem w i t h l i t i g a n t s i n a t l e a s t some F i r s t Amendment s e t t i n g s i s n o t
i n t i m i d a t i o n a t a l l b u t undue z e a l , as evidenced by t h e c a t a r a c t o f p o l i t i c a l
a c t o r s and a s s o c i a t i o n s t h a t s p i l l e d i n t o t h e Buckley courtroom. n57 The
r e a l i t i e s b e h i n d t h e a s s e r t i o n o f a p r e m o n i t o r y " c h i l l " have n o t been u n i f o r m l y
established.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n57
-Footnotes- -
See B u c k l e v , 424 U.S. a t 7-8.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
From a h i s t o r i c a l s t a n d p o i n t i t i s w o r t h remarking t h a t t h e e a r l i e s t o f t h e
modern d e c i s i o n s c i t e d f o r t h e Court's " f a c i a l o v e r b r e a d t h " d o c t r i n e i n F i r s t
Amendment cases i s NAACP v. B u t t o n . n58 That was a case f i r s t argued and d e c i d e d
i n the pre[*109]
v i o u s Term, i n an u n p u b l i s h e d m a j o r i t y o p i n i o n by J u s t i c e
F r a n k f u r t e r t h a t s u s t a i n e d t h e V i r g i n i a r e s t r i c t i o n s on p o l i t i c a l l i t i g a t i o n a t
issue i n t h a t case. n59 I n t h e s p r i n g o f 1962, however, F r a n k f u r t e r s u f f e r e d t h e
s t r o k e t h a t removed him from t h e Court, and J u s t i c e W h i t t a k e r , who had v o t e d
w i t h t h e m a j o r i t y , completed h i s planned f i v e - y e a r s e r v i c e and r e s i g n e d . The
NAACP case was t h e n s e t down f o r r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n and emerged i n 1963 as an
about-face r e v e r s a l o f i t s o r i g i n a l d e c i s i o n .
- Footnotesn58 371 U.S. 415, 432-33
U.S. 809, 816
(1975).
(1923),
cited in, e.g., Bigelow v. Virginia,
n59 Unpublished O p i n i o n o f Mr. J u s t i c e F r a n k f u r t e r
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
421
(on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I f a s i n g l e p o i n t o f j u d i c i a l d e p a r t u r e i s t o be l o c a t e d , i t may be here,
w i t h t h e breakup o f t h e c o n s e r v a t i v e m a j o r i t y under J u s t i c e F r a n k f u r t e r t h a t had
h e l d t h e Supreme Court i n check a g a i n s t p r e c i p i t a t e F i r s t Amendment
d e c i s i o n m a k i n g . Again, i f today t h e r e s h o u l d be a d i s p o s i t i o n o r d e s i r e t o have
the c u r r e n t Court r e t u r n t o p r e v i o u s l y s e t t l e d p r i n c i p l e s o f j u d i c i a l r e s t r a i n t ,
t h i s p o i n t o f h i s t o r y s h o u l d prove i n s t r u c t i v e .
At t h e moment, a t l e a s t , t h e r e i s l i t t l e s i g n o f such a d i s p o s i t i o n , a t
l e a s t among academic commentators. A l t h o u g h t h a t community i s by no means
m o n o l i t h i c , a m a j o r i t y o f i t s members seem now t o f a v o r what i s c a l l e d t h e
" p u b l i c a c t i o n " model o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a d j u d i c a t i o n , d i s p e n s i n g w i t h o r
�f|~ LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
member of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
f f i LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ J ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
member of rhe Rccd Elsevier pic group
�Page 71
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *109
s u b s t a n t i a l l y r e l a x i n g t h e requirement t h a t judgments about t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n be
i s s u e d by t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t s o n l y as an i n c i d e n t o f s e t t l i n g some c o n c r e t e
d i s p u t e between l i t i g a n t s . n60 I f change i s t o come, i t may have t o be from
another q u a r t e r .
- Footnotesn60 See t h e l i s t o f s c h o l a r l y w r i t i n g s i n Bator e t a l . ,
n.3 .
supra n o t e 7, a t 80
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - There a r e r e c o g n i z e d dangers t o t h e work and t h e s t a n d i n g o f t h e Supreme
Court from p e r s i s t i n g i n F i r s t Amendment f a c t l e s s n e s s . Such dangers i n c l u d e t h e
d i s t r a c t i o n o f t h e Court from i t s p r o p e r r o l e , i t s d i s t a n c i n g from needed
i n f o r m a t i o n , and i t s i n t r u s i o n i n t o t h e work o f t h e p o l i t i c a l branches o f
government. n61 These and r e l a t e d hazards i n v i t e our f u r t h e r a t t e n t i o n .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
n61 I d . a t 8 1 .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[*110]
A. Erroneous
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Decisions
The Supreme Court i n Buckley drew a d i s t i n c t i o n between u n l i m i t e d campaign
c o n t r i b u t i o n s , which i t t h o u g h t c o u l d have a c o r r u p t i n g e f f e c t , and u n l i m i t e d
e x p e n d i t u r e s , which i t b e l i e v e d c o u l d n o t . n62 A w e a l t h y c a n d i d a t e , i t s a i d ,
c o u l d n o t c o r r u p t h i m s e l f by drawing on h i s own o r h i s f a m i l y ' s r e s o u r c e s . n63
L i k e w i s e , independent e x p e n d i t u r e s - - n o t t o a c a n d i d a t e b u t on h i s b e h a l f - - c o u l d
s t i r no e x p e c t a t i o n o f reward. n64 More t h a n t h a t , t h e o v e r a l l e x p e n d i t u r e
l i m i t s p l a c e d by Congress on campaigns c o u l d do n o t h i n g by themselves t o
r e s t r i c t c o r r u p t i o n . The concern expressed by t h e c o u r t o f appeals t h a t
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s would be necessary t o c o n t a i n c i r c u m v e n t i o n o f t h e
c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s , n65 was d i s m i s s e d by t h e Court as "not p e r s u a s i v e . " n66 How
p e r s u a s i v e have t h e Supreme Court's own judgments t u r n e d o u t t o be?
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n62 Buckley,
424
n63 Id. at 53
n64 Id. at
U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
32-34.
n.59.
78-80.
n65 BucJcley, 519 F.2d
n66 B u c k l e y , 424 U.S. a t
at
859.
55.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The Court's removal o f l i m i t s on s o - c a l l e d independent e x p e n d i t u r e s l e d
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
^^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
1
c
D
J
l
O
^ ^ A * mcmbcr of thc —
Rccd Elsevier pk group
# 4 LEXIS-NEXISA
^ ^^A
-
1
r
1
D
J
t ; ,
:
' '
mcmbcr - -thc Rccd -Elsevier pk group
of —
�Page 72
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97,
*110
d i r e c t l y , i n t h e 1988 p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n s , t o t h e W i l l i e H o r t o n ads, which
were w i d e l y accounted t o have been among t h e basest and most i n f l u e n t i a l p i e c e s
of e l e c t o r a l d i s t o r t i o n i n modern t i m e s . n67 I t i s a t l e a s t n o t c l e a r t h a t
P r e s i d e n t Bush c o u l d have won t h a t e l e c t i o n w i t h o u t these d i s c r e d i t e d ads. n68
When t h e same "independent" promoter showed up i n 1992 w i t h a t e l e v i s e d
i n v i t a t i o n t o viewers t o w r i t e i n f o r an account o f Governor C l i n t o n ' s p e r s o n a l
i n d i s c r e t i o n s , and Bush s t r o v e t o d i s t a n c e h i m s e l f from t h i s e f f o r t , i t was
d i f f i c u l t f o r him t o sound a u t h e n t i c . n69
- Footnotesn67 See g e n e r a l l y K a t h l e e n H. Jamieson, D i r t y P o l i t i c s :
D i s t r a c t i o n , and Democracy 16-23 (1992) .
n68
Id. at
Deception,
16-17.
n69 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . C . and app. B.II.B.4-6; see a l s o Raskin &
B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 329.
-End
Footnotes-
The Supreme Court's removal o f l i m i t s on p e r s o n a l campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s l e d
d i r e c t l y , i n t h e 1992 e l e c t i o n , t o the candidacy o f Ross P e r o t , who vowed t o
spend $ 100 m i l l i o n o r
[*111]
more from h i s m u l t i b i l l i o n d o l l a r f o r t u n e t o
g a i n t h e Presidency. n70 To a c c u s a t i o n s t h a t t h i s would amount t o b u y i n g t h e
e l e c t i o n , Perot responded, "I'm b u y i n g i t f o r the American people." n71 Of
course, h i s opponents had t o equip themselves f i n a n c i a l l y t o keep pace. n72
- Footnotesn70 Michael I s i k o f f , Perot Gives Go-Ahead t o Continue B a l l o t D r i v e , Wash.
Post, J u l y 19, 1992, a t A18.
n71 C a t h e r i n e S. Manegold, The 1992 Campaign: Candidate's Record; Perot No
Longer U n f a m i l i a r o r Unmarked, Has Yet t o L i v e Down C r i t i c i s m , N.Y. Times, Oct.
1, 1992, a t A19.
n72 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . C . and app. B.II.B.7-9; see a l s o Raskin &
B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 328-29.
-End
Footnotes-
The Court's removal, f i n a l l y , o f l i m i t s on t o t a l campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s l e d
d i r e c t l y t o t h e breakdown o f t h e p r e s i d e n t i a l p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g system which was
supposed t o be c o n d i t i o n e d , and v a l i d a t e d , by t h e c a n d i d a t e s ' v o l u n t a r y
acceptance o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s . n73 The emergence o f u n l i m i t e d " s o f t " money,
f u n n e l e d t h r o u g h p a r t y committees f o r c a n d i d a t e expenses, has made a nonsense o f
t h i s b a r g a i n . n74
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n73 BucJcley, 424 U.S.
at
95,
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
107-08.
n74 See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . C . and app. B.II.B.10-12;
see a l s o Raskin &
�f|~ LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr ot'thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS*
•^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ J ^ A member ot" the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 73
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *111
B o n i f a z , supra n o t e 2, a t 327-28; Charles R. Babcock, Both P a r t i e s Raise
M i l l i o n s i n " S o f t Money," Wash. Post, J u l y 26, 1992, a t A l (summarizing a Center
f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s s t u d y on l a r g e c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o t h e major p o l i t i c a l
p a r t i e s ' n a t i o n a l committees).
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B. D i s r e g a r d o f Precedent
The Court c o u l d have a v o i d e d these e r r o r s and mischances by f o l l o w i n g i t s
own p r i o r d e c i s i o n s , p a r t i c u l a r l y those d i f f e r e n t i a t i n g "speech" from "conduct."
There was a l o n g a r r a y o f such "conduct" cases, c o n c e r n i n g such t h i n g s as
p e r m i t r e q u i r e m e n t s f o r speeches o r d e m o n s t r a t i o n s , i n which t h e Court had
upheld reasonable, c o n t e n t - n e u t r a l r e s t r i c t i o n s on F i r s t Amendment e x p r e s s i o n ,
i n t h e i n t e r e s t o f o r d e r o r harmony. n75 As t h e l a t e dean o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law
s c h o l a r s , Paul A. Freund, p u t t h e m a t t e r f o u r years b e f o r e Buckley, "We a r e
d e a l i n g [ i n campaign f i n a n c e ] n o t so much w i t h t h e r i g h t o f p e r s o n a l e x p r e s s i o n
or even a s s o c i a t i o n , b u t w i t h d o l l a r s and d e c i b e l s . And j u s t as t h e
[*112]
volume o f sound may be l i m i t e d by law, so t h e volume o f d o l l a r s may be l i m i t e d ,
w i t h o u t v i o l a t i n g t h e F i r s t Amendment." n76
- Footnotesn75 See, e.g., Kovacs v . Cooper, 336 U.S. 77 (1949)
New Hampshire, 312 U.S. 569 (1941) ( s t r e e t r a l l i e s ) .
(sound t r u c k s ) ; Cox v .
n76 Paul A. Freund, Commentary, i n F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n o f Campaign Finance:
Some C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Questions 7 1 , 72 ( A l b e r t J. Rosenthal ed., 1972) .
-End FootnotesThe Court i n s i s t e d however, i n i t s a b s t r a c t d e l i b e r a t i o n s , t h a t money was
somehow d i f f e r e n t , i n t h a t i t s l i m i t a t i o n would impose " d i r e c t q u a n t i t y
r e s t r i c t i o n s on p o l i t i c a l communication and a s s o c i a t i o n . " n77 And, as we have
seen, t h e Court d e c l a r e d t h a t such q u a n t i t y l i m i t s must i n e v i t a b l y i m p o v e r i s h
p o l i t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n . n78
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n77 Bucklev,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes- -
18.
n78 Jd. at 19.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
One might t h i n k t h a t e f f e c t i v e p o l i t i c a l d i s c u s s i o n would have more t o do
w i t h t h e q u a l i t y t h a n t h e q u a n t i t y o f speech. Indeed t h e modern p a t r i a r c h o f
f r e e speech t h e o r y , Alexander M e i k l e j o h n , reminded us t h a t t h e town
m e e t i n g - - t h a t exemplar o f democracy--has always had and r e q u i r e s a moderator t o
e n f o r c e r u l e s o f r e c o g n i t i o n and germaneness on i t s p r o c e e d i n g s . n79 T h i s i s
what a l l o w s t h e business o f t h e meeting t o be t r a n s a c t e d : "The town meeting, as
i t seeks f o r freedom o f p u b l i c d i s c u s s i o n o f p u b l i c problems, would be w h o l l y
i n e f f e c t u a l u n l e s s speech were thus a b r i d g e d . " n80
�LEXIS-NEXIS"
LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ A member of the R.ced Elsevier pk group
- ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Reed Elst
r pk group
&
LEXIS-NEXIS"
<L
S»
mbcr of the Reed Elst
r pk group
�Page 74
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *112
- Footnotesn79 Alexander Meiklejohn, Political Freedom: The Constitutional Powers of the
People 24-28 (1960). See also Harry Kalvan, Jr., The Concept of the Public
Forum, 1965 Sup. Ct. Rev. 1. "In any theory, speech has always been dependent on
some commitment to order and etiquette." Id. at 23.
n80 M e i k l e j o h n , supra note 79, a t 25.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
But t h e r e i s a c a t e g o r i c a l i m p e r a t i v e a t work i n t h e Court's d e c i s i o n t h a t
o v e r r i d e s such commonplace o b s e r v a t i o n s . The idea t h a t n o i s e l e v e l s , o r money
f l o w s , might u s e f u l l y be a t t e n u a t e d f o r t h e b e n e f i t o f a p o l i t i c a l audience was
judged t o be c o n t r a r y t o t h i s i m p e r a t i v e . "The concept t h a t government may
r e s t r i c t t h e speech o f some elements o f our s o c i e t y i n o r d e r t o enhance t h e
r e l a t i v e v o i c e o f o t h e r s i s w h o l l y f o r e i g n t o t h e F i r s t Amendment . . . ." n81
This begged t h e q u e s t i o n , o f course, whether money was speech o r t o be t r e a t e d
l i k e i t . And i t overrode t h e precedent o f t h e "Fairness D o c t r i n e " n82 i n
[*113]
b r o a d c a s t i n g , which was designed p r e c i s e l y t o e q u a l i z e speech
o p p o r t u n i t i e s and which t h e Supreme Court had r o u n d l y upheld j u s t seven years
b e f o r e . n83
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n8l Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
48-49.
n82 The "Fairness Doctrine" was an FCC-imposed requirement that public issues
be presented by broadcasters and that both sides of those issues receive fair
coverage. Red Lion Broadcasting
v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367, 375-77
(1969).
n83 I d . a t 367-401. The Court i n Bucklev c i t e d Red L i o n b u t p u r p o r t e d t o
d i s t i n g u i s h i t on grounds t h a t "the presumed e f f e c t o f t h e f a i r n e s s d o c t r i n e i s
one o f 'enhancing t h e volume and q u a l i t y o f coverage' o f p u b l i c i s s u e s . "
B u c k l e y , 424 U.S. a t 50 n . 55. This i s a purpose t h a t i s f a c t u a l l y i d e n t i c a l
w i t h t h a t o f mandatory spending l i m i t s . See d i s c u s s i o n i n f r a p a r t I I I . D .
-End
Footnotes-
One has t o wonder--again i n commonplace terms--whether, i f t h e
Lincoln-Douglas debates had been s y s t e m a t i c a l l y i n t e r r u p t e d by a t h i r d person
w i t h a megaphone, o r i f e i t h e r speaker had c l a i m e d t h e r i g h t t o preempt
t w o - t h i r d s o f t h e a v a i l a b l e t i m e , anyone would have supposed t h e c o n s t a b l e t o be
powerless t o r e s t o r e o r d e r .
But we a r e n o t l i m i t e d t o h y p o t h e t i c a l s . The d i s t o r t i n g * p o w e r o f money on
e l e c t i o n s has been known by t h e Supreme Court i t s e l f f o r a v e r y l o n g t i m e . I n Ex
p a r t e Yarbrough, n84 a v o t e r - i n t i m i d a t i o n case, J u s t i c e M i l l e r wrote f o r a
unanimous Court t h a t Congress must have t h e power t o make laws " f o r t h e f r e e ,
the pure, and t h e safe e x e r c i s e o f t h e r i g h t o f v o t i n g . " n85 And he warned about
the growing power o f money i n t h i s c o n n e c t i o n : "The f r e e use o f money i n
e l e c t i o n s , a r i s i n g from t h e v a s t growth o f r e c e n t w e a l t h i n c e r t a i n q u a r t e r s ,
p r e s e n t s equal cause f o r a n x i e t y . I f t h e government o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s has
w i t h i n i t s c o n s t i t u t i o n a l domain no a u t h o r i t y t o p r o v i d e a g a i n s t these e v i l s . .
�%k LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ J ^ A member of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
| l i LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ § ^ A mcmbcr of the Reed Elsevier pic group
%t LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
�Page 75
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 113
. t h e n , indeed, i s t h e c o u n t r y i n danger . . . ." n86 The Yarbrough w a r n i n g was
n e i t h e r n o t i c e d n o r d e a l t w i t h by t h e p r e v a i l i n g o p i n i o n i n Buckley v. Valeo.
n87
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n84 110 U.S.
651
n85 Id. at
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(1884).
662.
n86 Id. at
-Footnotes-
667.
n87 424 U.S. 1 (1976). The Yarbrough warning was n o t i c e d i n , and f u r n i s h e d
the p o i n t o f d e p a r t u r e f o r , J u s t i c e White's d i s s e n t i n g o p i n i o n i n Buckley. I d .
a t 257 (White, J., c o n c u r r i n g i n p a r t and d i s s e n t i n g i n p a r t ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C. P o l i t i c a l
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Intrusion
The Supreme Court i n Buckley d i d n o t s i m p l y r e j e c t Congress' handiwork; i t
r e w r o t e i t . I f a s t a t u t e i s judged t o be overbroad, and some o f i t s p r o v i s i o n s
are i n v a l i d a t e d on t h e i r f a c e , what remains may n o t be a t a l l what t h e
l e g i s l a t o r s or
[*114]
even t h e l i t i g a n t s had i n mind. n88 By c o n t r a s t , when
an a c t i s d e c l a r e d u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i n a s p e c i f i c a p p l i c a t i o n , i t s framers a r e
l e f t f r e e t o r e d e s i g n i t t o g e t around t h e i d e n t i f i e d problem. A b s t r a c t o r
a d v i s o r y judgments do n o t a l l o w t h a t o p p o r t u n i t y , and leave i n t h e i r wake what
may verge on immutable l e g i s l a t i o n - - w i t h o u t t h e b e n e f i t o f committee h e a r i n g s t o
connect t h e law t o r e a l i t y .
- Footnotesn88 See i d . a t 108-09; i d . a t 255 (Burger, C.J., c o n c u r r i n g i n p a r t and
d i s s e n t i n g i n p a r t ) ; see g e n e r a l l y Note, supra n o t e 55, a t 851.
-End FootnotesF e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r wrote a g a i n and a g a i n , as a law p r o f e s s o r and a l s o as a
J u s t i c e , t h a t t h e U.S. Supreme Court i s n o t a House o f Lords w i t h r e v i s o r y power
over l e g i s l a t i o n . n89 More p o i n t e d l y , he observed t h a t " t h e c o n t r o v e r s y between
l e g i s l a t u r e and c o u r t s , i n i s s u e s which m a t t e r most, i s n o t a t a l l a c o n t r o v e r s y
about l e g a l p r i n c i p l e s , b u t concerns t h e a p p l i c a t i o n o f a d m i t t e d p r i n c i p l e s t o
c o m p l i c a t e d and o f t e n e l u s i v e f a c t s . " n90 Departure from t h i s d i s c i p l i n e o f
f a c t s can l a u n c h t h e Court i n t o a f r e e - f l o a t i n g c o n f r o n t a t i o n w i t h t h e p o l i t i c a l
branches o f government, i n which t h e Court i s w i t h o u t i t s l e g i t i m a t i n g excuse o f
law a p p l i c a t i o n t o i n d i v i d u a l cases.
-Footnotes- n89 E.g., F r a n k f u r t e r , supra n o t e 1, a t 1003.
n90 I d . a t 1004.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
�m
LEXIS-NEXIS*
LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
^ J ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
mcmbcr ot the Reed Elsevier pk group
m
LEXIS-NEXIS*
•^^A
mcmbcr of the Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 76
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *114
There i s no p a r t i c u l a r reason f o r t h e Congress o r t h e P r e s i d e n t , o r f o r t h a t
m a t t e r t h e c o u n t r y , t o r e s p e c t such an i n t r u d e r . I n e a r l i e r cases, such as t h e
Dred S c o t t n91 d e c i s i o n , when t h e Court has reached o u t and decided a
c o n t r o v e r s i a l q u e s t i o n n o t p r o p e r l y b e f o r e i t , t h e p o l i t i c a l branches have f e l t
f r e e t o w i t h h o l d t h e i r acceptance. P r e s i d e n t L i n c o l n i n h i s F i r s t I n a u g u r a l
Address d e c l a r e d t h a t such d e t e r m i n a t i o n s cannot f o r e c l o s e t h e p u b l i c p o l i c y o f
the U n i t e d S t a t e s , f o r o t h e r w i s e " t h e people w i l l have ceased t o be t h e i r own
r u l e r s , h a v i n g t o t h a t e x t e n t p r a c t i c a l l y r e s i g n e d t h e i r Government i n t o t h e
hands o f t h a t eminent t r i b u n a l . " n92
-Footnotesn91 60 U.S.
(19
How.)
393
(1857).
n92 6 James D. Richardson, Messages and Papers o f t h e P r e s i d e n t s 5, 9 (1897) .
The people themselves today, when g i v e n an o p p o r t u n i t y , e v i n c e d i s d a i n f o r
B u c k l e v v . Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976). Gathered i n focus groups by competent
o p i n i o n t a k e r s , t h e y express d i s b e l i e f i n i t s r u l i n g and t h e n d i s m i s s a l . C e l i n d a
Lake, o f Greenberg-Lake A s s o c i a t e s , Remarks a t a F i r s t Amendment C o n s u l t a t i o n
convened by t h e a u t h o r o f t h i s A r t i c l e (Apr. 19, 1993) .
-End
Footnotes-
[*115]
I t s h o u l d be t h e r o l e o f j u d i c i a l statesmanship
of r e a c t i o n .
t o avoid arousing that kind
D. R i g i d i t y o f Judgment
The Court, by making dubious a t - l a r g e pronouncements about c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
m a t t e r s , can t i e t h e r e m e d i a t i n g hands n o t o n l y o f t h e l e g i s l a t u r e b u t o f
i t s e l f . D i f f e r e n t i a t i n g one f a c t u a l circumstance from another i s what a l l o w s
some p l a y i n t h e a d j u d i c a t i v e j o i n t s and i n s o c i a l arrangements. I t i s much
harder t o e n t e r t a i n such v a r i a t i o n s when t h e i s s u e i s whether one i s b e i n g
f a i t h f u l t o some a p r i o r i d e c l a r a t i o n .
The modern Court has d i s c o v e r e d t h i s d i f f i c u l t y f o r i t s e l f i n another area
of c o n s t i t u t i o n a l c o n t r o v e r s y . I n Planned Parenthood v. Casey, n93 t h e Court
w r e s t l e d w i t h t h e q u e s t i o n o f whether Roe v. Wade, n94 immunizing a b o r t i o n from
r e g u l a t i o n , s h o u l d be open t o r e e x a m i n a t i o n . n95 The g e n e r a l c l i m a t e o f o p i n i o n
concerning Roe, i n t h e c o u n t r y and i n Congress, c o u l d more a c c u r a t e l y be c a l l e d
an uproar t h a n a s e t t l e m e n t . Yet t h i s v e r y s t a t e o f beleaguerment was made a
b a s i s f o r r e f u s i n g r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n . The l e g i t i m a c y o f t h e Court was seen, i n i t s
p l u r a l i t y o p i n i o n , n96 t o depend on p e r s i s t e n c e i n p o t e n t i a l e r r o r . The Court
must n o t " o v e r r u l e under f i r e " o r be p e r c e i v e d t o c u t and r u n i n t h e face o f
c o n t r o v e r s y . I t c o u l d l o c a t e no room f o r sober second t h o u g h t .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n93 505 U.S.
833
(1992).
n94 410 U.S.
113
(1973).
-Footnotes-
�I LEXIS-NEXIS*
i
_ f .1
•
i tri
:
- ^ J ^ Ak mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS*
- L i
_ r . i - _ r. _ _ r i
_i
- ^ ^ J k mcmbcr of thc RccdJ Elsevier pk . group
A
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS*
^ • ^ ^
-^^A
i
i
. . L I > _ _ I-I
i
._
mcmbcr of rthe - ReedJ Elsevier pk . group
�Page 77
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 115
n95 Casey,
n96
I d . at
505 U.S.
at
844.
866-67 ( o p i n i o n o f O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, J J . ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
T h i s i s n o t a s a t i s f a c t o r y s t a t e o f a f f a i r s - - f o r t h e Court,
the c o u n t r y . n97
t h e Congress, o r
-Footnotesn97 I t s h o u l d be unnecessary t o add t h a t one's view on t h i s p o i n t has n o t h i n g
n e c e s s a r i l y t o do w i t h t h e u l t i m a t e m e r i t s o f t h e a b o r t i o n - r i g h t s c o n t r o v e r s y .
-End
III.
Footnotes-
Correctives
A. Voiding Valeo
I n t h e F i r s t Restatement o f Judgments, p u b l i s h e d i n 1942, t h e American Law
I n s t i t u t e decreed t h a t a judgment rendered w i t h o u t s u b j e c t - m a t t e r j u r i s d i c t i o n
i s v o i d . n98 That would mean,
[*116]
i f taken l i t e r a l l y , t h a t an a d v i s o r y
o p i n i o n l i k e t h a t i n Buckley v. Valeo would be w i t h o u t f o r c e o r e f f e c t , even as
between t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e l a w s u i t ; i t c o u l d be a n n u l l e d c o l l a t e r a l l y o r i g n o r e d
i n l a t e r proceedings r a i s i n g t h e same q u e s t i o n s . I n p r a c t i c e t h i s t u r n e d o u t t o
be t o o sweeping an i n v a l i d a t i o n , and had t o be m o d i f i e d so c o n s i d e r a b l y t h a t a
new f o r m u l a t i o n was drawn up i n 1982. n99
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - -
n98 Restatement o f Judgments s e c t i o n 7 (1942).
n99 Restatement (Second) o f Judgments s e c t i o n 11 (1982) .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - -
As now phrased, t h e r u l e reads t h a t "a judgment may p r o p e r l y be rendered . .
. o n l y i f t h e c o u r t has a u t h o r i t y t o a d j u d i c a t e t h e type o f c o n t r o v e r s y i n v o l v e d
i n t h e a c t i o n . " The f i r s t example g i v e n o f a u t h o r i t y l i m i t a t i o n i s A r t i c l e I I I
of t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n , which " d e f i n e s t h e k i n d s o f proceedings t h a t Congress may
a u t h o r i z e [ t h e f e d e r a l c o u r t s ] t o e n t e r t a i n . " nlOO These l i m i t s may be invoked
by t h e p a r t i e s t o t h e proceeding, and by t h e c o u r t , b u t n o t o r d i n a r i l y a f t e r t h e
judgment i s f i n a l . n l O l I n most i n s t a n c e s , t h e i n t e r e s t i n f i n a l i t y o f
l i t i g a t i o n s h o u l d o v e r - r i d e t h e i n t e r e s t i n c u r b i n g excesses o f j u d i c i a l power.
nl02
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nlOO I d . a t cmt. a.
n l O l I d . a t cmts. c , d.
-Footnotes-
�i l ' LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Rlscvicr pic group
LEXIS'-NEXIS*
LEXIS-NEXIS'
• ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd F.lscvier pk group
'6<^
A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 78
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *116
nl02 I d . s e c t i o n 12 cmt. a., s e c t i o n 69 cmt. c.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes- -
But not always. I f the e r r o r i s p l a i n , the Restatement, even today, would
allow annulment. nl03 And i f "plainness" can be thought to import an element of
s i g n i f i c a n c e , the j u d i c i a l overreaching i n Buckley v. Valeo could perhaps
q u a l i f y . As Professor Frankfurter wrote i n h i s annual assessments of the work of
the Supreme Court: " I n a l l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l cases, . . . j u r i s d i c t i o n a l
l i m i t a t i o n s assume p e c u l i a r importance, i n t e n s i f i e d where the Court's
a d j u d i c a t i o n r e s o l v e s what i s i n e f f e c t a controversy between i t s e l f and the
Congress . . . ." nl04 That i s a good d e s c r i p t i o n of the stakes a t play i n
Buckley.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n l 0 3 I d . s e c t i o n s 1 2 ( 1 ) , 69.
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl04 Felix Frankfurter & Henry M. Hart, Jr., The Business of the Supreme
Court at October Term, 1934, 49 Harv. L. Rev. 68, 93-94
(1935).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B. D i s r e g a r d i n g F a c t l e s s D e c i s i o n s
But we need n o t debate t h e a p p l i c a b i l i t y t o Buckley o f t h e e x c e p t i o n s i n t h e
Restatement. For t h e i s s u e i s n o t r e s j u d i c a t a as between t h e p a r t i e s , i t i s
s t a r e d e c i s i s f o r t h e Court and f u t u r e l i t i g a n t s . And here t h e t r a d i t i o n s
strongly favor revising
[*117]
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l d e c i s i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y those
based on d o u b t f u l f a c t u a l assumptions, s i n c e t h e y a r e o t h e r w i s e u n c o r r e c t a b l e
save by amendment t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n .
Chief J u s t i c e Taney and J u s t i c e Brandeis expressed i n t h e i r times what i s
s t i l l regarded as t h e h i s t o r i c a l l y v a l i d view on t h i s p o i n t . The C h i e f J u s t i c e
wrote:
I . . . am q u i t e w i l l i n g t h a t i t be regarded h e r e a f t e r as t h e law o f t h i s
c o u r t , t h a t i t s o p i n i o n upon t h e c o n s t r u c t i o n o f t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n i s always open
t o d i s c u s s i o n when i t i s supposed t o have been founded i n e r r o r , and t h a t i t s
j u d i c i a l a u t h o r i t y s h o u l d h e r e a f t e r depend a l t o g e t h e r on t h e f o r c e o f t h e
r e a s o n i n g by which i t i s supported. n l 0 5
-Footnotesn l 0 5 Smith v . Turner, 48 U.S.
dissenting).
(7 How.) 283,
-End
470
(1849)
(Taney, C.J.,
Footnotes-
L i k e w i s e J u s t i c e B r a n d e i s : " I n cases i n v o l v i n g t h e Federal C o n s t i t u t i o n ,
where c o r r e c t i o n t h r o u g h l e g i s l a t i v e a c t i o n i s p r a c t i c a l l y i m p o s s i b l e , t h i s
c o u r t has o f t e n o v e r r u l e d i t s e a r l i e r d e c i s i o n s . The c o u r t bows t o t h e lessons
of experience and t h e f o r c e o f b e t t e r r e a s o n i n g . . . ." n l 0 6
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ ^ A member of rhe Reed Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
'6<^
A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk- group
LEXIS-NEXIS'
member of the Reed Elsevier pk- group
�Page 79
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *117
n l 0 6 Burnet v . Coronado O i l & Gas Co.,
J., d i s s e n t i n g ) ( f o o t n o t e o m i t t e d ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
285 U.S.
-End Footnotes-
393,
406-08 (1932)
(Brandeis,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
C. P r e s e n t i n g New Facts
The lessons o f e x p e r i e n c e , o f course, a r e b e s t s u b m i t t e d t o a c o u r t as
a d j u d i c a t i v e o r l e g i s l a t i v e f a c t s b e a r i n g on t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i s s u e s t o be
decided. Even t h e p l u r a l i t y i n Planned Parenthood v. Casey n l 0 7 a l l o w e d t h a t
s t a r e d e c i s i s c o u l d y i e l d t o such a d e m o n s t r a t i o n : When t h e f a c t s apparent t o
the Court a r e " c l e a r l y a t odds" w i t h t h e premise o f an e a r l y d e c i s i o n , t h e n i t s
r e e x a m i n a t i o n i s "not o n l y j u s t i f i e d b u t r e q u i r e d . " n l 0 8 There i s a t hand f o r
t h i s purpose a s u b s t a n t i a l a r r a y o f p e r t i n e n t f a c t s , e i t h e r a l r e a d y on r e c o r d o r
ready t o be made so.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl07 505 U.S.
nl08 Id. at
833
(1992)
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(opinion of O'Connor, Kennedy, and Souter, JJ.).
863.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
To b e g i n w i t h , t h e Bucklev Court has been o v e r r u l e d by e x p e r i e n c e i n i t s
a s s e r t i o n t h a t " v i r t u a l l y a l l m e a n i n g f u l p o l i t i c a l communications i n t h e modern
s e t t i n g involve the expenditure
[*118]
o f money." n l 0 9 I n t h e 1992
p r e s i d e n t i a l campaign, i t was t h e f r e e p o l i t i c a l media t h a t dominated. Many o f
the c a n d i d a t e s ' most t e l l i n g appearances were made on t a l k shows, i n t e r v i e w
programs, and t e l e v i s e d debates. n l l O A l l o f these appearances were f r e e o f
charge and a l l o f f e r e d more media exposure--of t h e c a n d i d a t e , and o f h i s
themes--than e i t h e r news programs o r p a i d a d v e r t i s e m e n t s . As Ross Perot p u t i t
when he i n i t i a l l y t u r n e d down h i s p r o f e s s i o n a l a d v i s e r s ' p r o p o s a l f o r an
expensive ad campaign, "'Why pay good money f o r something you can g e t f o r
free?'" n l l l
-Footnotesnl09 Buckley,
424 U.S.
at
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
11.
n l l O See R i c h a r d Harwood, The Growing I r r e l e v a n c e o f J o u r n a l i s t s , Wash. Post,
Oct. 23, 1992, a t A21; E l i z a b e t h K o l b e r t , W h i s t l e Stops a l a 1992: A r s e n i o ,
L a r r y and P h i l , N.Y. Times, June 5, 1992, a t A18; F i n a l Debate Tops R a t i n g , N.Y.
Times, Oct. 2 1 , 1992, a t A19.
n l l l John M i n t z & David Von D r e h l e , Why Perot Walked Away, Wash. Post, J u l y
19, 1992, a t A l , A18; see a l s o i n f r a apps. A.2.XIII-XV, B.2.C.1-8.
-End
Footnotes-
The Supreme Court i n Bucklev a l s o m a i n t a i n e d t h a t p e r s o n a l w e a l t h does n o t
i n c u b a t e c o r r u p t i o n and i s t h e r e f o r e n o t a cause f o r concern i n p o l i t i c a l
campaigns. n l l 2 There a r e , however, o t h e r causes f o r concern: t h e p u l l t h a t
�LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd F.lscvier pk group
#4
LEXIS-NEXIS'
'6<^
A
—
r of * " Rccd Elsevier pk group
thc " '
'""
'"
f
k
D
J
C:,
:
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
'
^^ ^ A
*
mcmbcr of rhe "
Rccd Klsevier '" group
pic
'
D
J
�Page 80
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *118
l i m i t l e s s r e s o u r c e s can e x e r t on b o t h campaigning and t h e conduct o f o f f i c e byless wealthy r i v a l s . n l l 3
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nll2 Bucklev,
424 U.S. at
-Footnotes- -
53.
n l l 3 See i n f r a apps. A.2.XVI, B . I I . B . 8 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -End Footnotes-
As f o r t h e Court's f i n d i n g t h a t "independent" campaign ads are i n e f f e c t i v e
because t h e y a r e n o t c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h t h e c a n d i d a t e , n l l 4 t h i s i s b e l i e d by t h e
W i l l i e Horton ads o f 1988, which s t u d i e s show t o have been h i g h l y e f f e c t i v e and
perhaps r e s p o n s i b l e f o r George Bush g a i n i n g t h e p r e s i d e n c y . The most c a r e f u l
s t u d y o f t h e campaign shows t h a t Bush i n a u g u r a t e d t h e use o f t h e W i l l i e H o r t o n
s t o r y i n h i s June 1988 campaign speeches. n l l 5 I n September, t h e "independent"
N a t i o n a l S e c u r i t y P o l i t i c a l A c t i o n Committee (NSPAC) t e l e v i s i o n ad made i t s
appearance, f o l l o w e d i n October by t h e Bush campaign's own " r e v o l v i n g door"
a d v e r t i s e m e n t . Bush f o r m a l l y r e p u d i a t e d t h e NSPAC ads, by t h e n i d e n t i f i e d as
r a c i s t ; b u t a new s e t o f these ads was shown i n t h e f i n a l two weeks o f t h e
campaign. Bush h i m s e l f c o n t i n u e d t o t a l k about W i l l i e H o r t o n , g e n e r a t i n g press
photos
[*119]
and coverage, t h r o u g h o u t t h i s p e r i o d . He d i d so w i t h o u t
m e n t i o n i n g Horton's r a c e , which was w e l l e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e n i n t h e NSPAC ads.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nll4 Bucklev,
n l l 5 Jamieson,
424 U.S. at
-Footnotes- -
45.
supra n o t e 67, a t 16-27.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
Thus t h e Bush campaign b o t h spawned and p r o f i t e d
independent ad.
from a p r o f e s s e d l y
That i s t h e way t h i n g s happen i n t h e r e a l p o l i t i c a l w o r l d . I n 1980, a s l a t e
of s e n i o r Republican s t r a t e g i s t s o r g a n i z e d an "independent" committee f o r Ronald
Reagan w i t h t h e avowed o b j e c t i v e o f r a i s i n g and spending up t o $ 50 m i l l i o n f o r
the Reagan campaign. n l l 6 A t t h e Republican Convention t h a t year, committee
member Senator Jesse Helms conceded t h a t i t was d i f f i c u l t sometimes t o keep up
the appearances o f detachment: " I ' v e had t o , s o r t o f , t a l k i n d i r e c t l y w i t h
[Reagan campaign chairman] Paul L a x a l t and hope t h a t he would pass a l o n g , uh,
and I t h i n k t h e messages have g o t t e n t h r o u g h a l l r i g h t . " n l l 7 The committee and
the campaign c o u l d keep a b r e a s t o f each o t h e r , as business c o l l a b o r a t o r s do,
t h r o u g h p a r a l l e l p u b l i c s t a t e m e n t s . And t h e committee p o r t r a y e d i t s e l f t o
c o n t r i b u t o r s as h a v i n g i n f l u e n c e w i t h t h e c a n d i d a t e .
- Footnotesn l l 6 Anne V. Simonett, The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f R e g u l a t i n g Independent
E x p e n d i t u r e Committees i n P u b l i c l y Funded P r e s i d e n t i a l Campaigns, 18 Harv. J. on
L e g i s . 679, 685-87 (1981).
�I LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
1
-^-^ A* member of -the- n - . j ^ Elsevier pic group
r L Reed i
•
_
•^^^
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS'
. member of rhe Reed ,Elsevier_pic group
.
J ..
_ .— _
B
r
�Page 81
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 119
n l l l I n t e r v i e w o f Senator Jesse Helms by Sander Vanocur (ABC News t e l e v i s i o n
broadcast, J u l y 16, 1980), quoted i n B r i e f f o r P e t i t i o n e r a t 30, Carter-Mondale
R e e l e c t i o n Comm. v. FEC, Nos. 80-1841, 80-1842 (D.C. C i r . Sept. 12, 1980),
quoted i n Simonett, supra n o t e 14 8, a t 687 n. 42.
-End
Footnotes-
The Court has a l s o been shown t o be i n e r r o r i n i t s p r e d i c t i o n t h a t
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s would be unnecessary t o m a i n t a i n t h e i n t e g r i t y o f
c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s . n l l 8 I n f a c t , the a v a i l a b i l i t y of u n l i m i t e d expenditures
has brought heavy p r e s s u r e t o bear on t h e campaign f i n a n c i n g system l e f t i n
p l a c e by t h e Court, w i t h huge " s o f t money" and o t h e r evasions o f t h e
c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s . n l l 9 I n t h e eyes o f v e t e r a n observer H e r b e r t Alexander,
these have d e s t r o y e d t h e p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g scheme t h a t t h e Court approved. n l 2 0
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Footnotesnll8 Bucklev,
424 U.S. at
55-56.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n l l 9 See Raskin & B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 328-29; i n f r a , p a r t I I I . C . and
app. B.II.B.7-9.
n l 2 0 ABA S p e c i a l Comm. on E l e c t i o n Reform, Campaign F i n a n c i n g a f t e r
v. Valeo 2-4 (1976) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*120]
-End Footnotes-
Bucklev
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
So, t h e f a c t s have changed o r become c l e a r e r w i t h t i m e , thus e s t a b l i s h i n g
one b a s i s f o r o v e r r u l i n g o r l i m i t i n g Buckley v. Valeo. A f u r t h e r b a s i s f o r d o i n g
so i s t h e broadening o f r a t i o n a l e s f o r c u r b i n g campaign e x p e n d i t u r e .
D. Broadening t h e R a t i o n a l e
The Court i n Buckley and r e l a t e d d e c i s i o n s found o n l y one m o t i v a t i n g impulse
f o r c o n g r e s s i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n o f campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s : " P r e v e n t i n g c o r r u p t i o n o r
the appearance o f c o r r u p t i o n a r e t h e o n l y l e g i t i m a t e and c o m p e l l i n g government
i n t e r e s t s thus f a r i d e n t i f i e d f o r r e s t r i c t i n g campaign f i n a n c e s . " n l 2 1 I t was
because a c a n d i d a t e ' s e x p e n d i t u r e s from h i s own pocket o r h i s own campaign
t r e a s u r y , a l o n g w i t h u n c o o r d i n a t e d e x p e n d i t u r e s by o t h e r s , c o u l d n o t be
c l a s s i f i e d as q u i d p r o quo t r a n s a c t i o n s , t h a t t h e Buckley Court h e l d them t o be
nonregulatable. nl22
- Footnotesnl21 FEC v. National
496-97
(1985).
nl22 Bucklev,
Conservative
424 U.S. at 26-27,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Political
45,
Action
Comm.,
470 U.S.
480,
53.
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
But t h a t i s n o t t h e o n l y o r even n e c e s s a r i l y t h e s t r o n g e s t r a t i o n a l e f o r
c u r b i n g campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s . Others can be i d e n t i f i e d and c o u l d be p r o c l a i m e d
�M
TM
^^^^^^^
§
-
) LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
.^^^^^^^^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
^^^^A member of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
^
*
1
D
—
1
1
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
^
4
member of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
1
e
k
D
1
* - — t'-—
;
1
�Page 82
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *120
by l e g i s l a t i o n as t h e f o u n d a t i o n f o r a f r e s h e f f o r t a t campaign f i n a n c e r e f o r m .
To b e g i n w i t h , a l i m i t a t i o n on campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s may be s a i d t o improve
the conduct o f p u b l i c business by o f f i c e h o l d e r s , i n two senses. F i r s t an
incumbent who c o n s t a n t l y needs t o r a i s e money f o r t h e n e x t campaign i s n o t f r e e
t o address h i m s e l f t o t h e t a s k s f o r which he o r she was e l e c t e d , namely,
l e g i s l a t i n g and o v e r s e e i n g t h e e x e c u t i v e . n l 2 3 As one s t a t e l e g i s l a t o r has
commented: " ' I ' v e been s i t t i n g here f o r two hours t h i s morning t r y i n g h a r d t o
l i s t e n t o t e s t i m o n y . But a l l I ended up d o i n g was making l i s t s o f people who
might p u t down $ 1,000 f o r a t a b l e a t my next f u n d - r a i s e r . ' " n l 2 4
- Footnotesn l 2 3 See Campaign Finance Reform: Hearings on S.J. Res. 21, S.J. Res. 130,
and S.J. Res. 166 Before t h e Subcomm. on t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n o f t h e Senate
J u d i c i a r y Comm., 100th Cong., 2d Sess. 15 (1988) ( t e s t i m o n y o f Senator Ernest F.
Hollings).
n l 2 4 C a l i f o r n i a Comm'n on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , The New Gold Rush: F i n a n c i n g
C a l i f o r n i a ' s L e g i s l a t i v e Campaigns, Summary Report 10 (1985).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*121]
-End
Footnotes-
This i s d e f e n s i v e f u n d - r a i s i n g , and i t i n t e r f e r e s w i t h p u b l i c business
w i t h o u t r e g a r d t o t h e source o f t h e apprehended a s s a u l t . The money t h a t provokes
concern c o u l d come e q u a l l y from a w e a l t h y c h a l l e n g e r , an "independent"
committee, o r o r d i n a r y campaign funds. So l o n g as i t i s u n l i m i t e d , i t p l a y s
u n l i m i t e d hob w i t h an o f f i c e h o l d e r ' s a t t e n t i o n t o business.
The same t h i n g i s t r u e o f t h e p r i n c i p a l use t o which l i m i t l e s s c h a l l e n g e r
e x p e n d i t u r e s t e n d t o be p u t : t h e p r o d u c t i o n and r e p e a t e d d i s p l a y o f 30-second
a t t a c k ads on t e l e v i s i o n . These " k i l l e r ads" are n o t e w o r t h y f o r d i s t o r t i n g more
t h a n t h e y r e v e a l , and f o r d w e l l i n g on s u p e r f i c i a l i t i e s more t h a n on genuine
i s s u e s . n l 2 5 T h e i r p r o s p e c t i v e use has a well-documented, s e r i o u s l y c o n s t r i c t i n g
e f f e c t on debate and d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c business, on c o n t r o v e r s i a l
s u b j e c t s l i k e t h e growth o f f e d e r a l e n t i t l e m e n t s , because t h e incumbent has t o
worry l e s s about what i s r i g h t and more about how h i s p o s i t i o n may be
r e p r e s e n t e d i n a 30-second TV a s s a u l t . n l 2 6
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n l 2 5 See Jamieson, supra note 67, a t 15-23.
nl26 See Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t : Hearings on S. 743, S. 744, and S. 1009
Before t h e Subcomm. on Communications o f t h e Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science
and T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 100th Cong., 1 s t Sess. 68 (1989) [ h e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on
Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t ] (statement o f C u r t i s B. Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r
the Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End
Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Thus, t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t a regime o f l i m i t l e s s e x p e n d i t u r e s tends t o open up
�LEXIS-NEXIS
-6<^A
member of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
A
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
l
r
- ^ ^ ^ A* member - -'-ihe •»--• Elsevier pk group
— of
Reed
® k LEXIS'-NEXIS"
" ^ ^ A* mcmbcr of ^- -thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
D
i
�Page 83
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 121
a p o t e n t i a l f o r l i m i t l e s s a t t a c k s a g a i n s t incumbent o f f i c e h o l d e r s , t h e p u b l i c
business s u f f e r s . T h i s r a t i o n a l e f o r c u r b i n g e x p e n d i t u r e s i s u n a f f e c t e d by
a n y t h i n g decided i n Bucicley v. Valeo.
So i s t h e o t h e r major r a t i o n a l e n o t c o n s i d e r e d i n Buckley, which i s t h a t
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s may a c t u a l l y improve speech--in t h e r o o t sense o f d i s c o u r s e ,
as opposed t o noise--more than t h e y d e t r a c t from i t . n l 2 7 R e g u l a t i o n s l i m i t i n g
campaign spending would encourage a movement away from s t u d i o appearances and
toward p u b l i c canvassing, which i s b o t h l e s s expensive and more p a r t i c i p a t o r y ,
hence more p r o d u c t i v e o f F i r s t Amendment speech and a s s o c i a t i o n . n l 2 8 This
movement would t e n d t o overcome t h e d e l e t e r i o u s e f f e c t s o f
[*122]
the
p r e s e n t widespread r e l i a n c e on campaign TV, which has meant t h a t r e l a t i v e l y
l i t t l e i s spent by most c a n d i d a t e s on campaign a c t i v i t i e s engaging t h e
c i t i z e n r y . As C u r t i s Gans d e s c r i b e s t h e c u r r e n t scene, "we have developed t h e
p o l i t i c a l e q u i v a l e n t o f t h e S i l e n t S p r i n g i n American p o l i t i c s , i n which t h e r e
are no l o n g e r b u t t o n s and bumper s t i c k e r s , phone banks and f i e l d o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,
v o l u n t e e r s and p a r t i c i p a n t s . We m a n i p u l a t e our c i t i z e n s , we do n o t i n v o l v e
them." n l 2 9
- Footnotesnl27 See, e.g., Marlene A. Nicholson, Political Campaign Expenditure
Limitations and the Unconstitutional Condition Doctrine, 10 Hastings
Const.
601,
631-32
nl28 See Developments in the Law: Elections, 88 Harv.
(1975)
L.Q.
(1983).
L. Rev.
llll,
1238
.
n l 2 9 Hearings
on Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g Act, supra note 126, a t 67.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Reliance on t e l e v i s i o n , an expensive medium, has had a p a r t i c u l a r tendency
t o debase t h e c u r r e n c y o f p o l i t i c a l speech. I t t o o e a s i l y t r u n c a t e s and
t r i v i a l i z e s t h e messages i t d e l i v e r s , condensing f o r example a complex c h a i n o f
r e a s o n i n g i n t o an e m o t i o n a l l y charged ten-second "sound b i t e . " I t focuses i t s
l e n s on s u r f a c e t r a i t s o f p e r s o n a l i t y and appearance, t o t h e d e t r i m e n t o f
c h a r a c t e r and competence assessments, which i s what t h e v o t e r s need t o make an
i n f o r m e d s e l e c t i o n . And access t o t e l e v i s i o n , a l o n g w i t h money, i s what has
l i b e r a t e d o f f i c e seekers from t h e r e s p o n s i b l e t u t e l a g e o f p a r t y o r g a n i z a t i o n s ,
w i t h a l l t h a t i m p l i e s f o r t h e a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f a government h e t e r o g e n e o u s l y
i n s t a l l e d . nl30
- Footnotesn l 3 0 See K a t h l e e n H. Jamieson & K a r l y n K. Campbell, The I n t e r p l a y o f
I n f l u e n c e : News, A d v e r t i s i n g , P o l i t i c s , and t h e Mass Media 282-83 (3d. ed.
1992).
-End
Footnotes-
Beyond t h a t , l i m i t l e s s money i n p o l i t i c a l campaigns--whether spent on
t e l e v i s i o n o r f o r o t h e r purposes--tends t o show up i n s c u r r i l o u s o r d e c e p t i v e
speech and p r a c t i c e s . n l 3 1 This i s a t e m p t a t i o n f o r a l l campaigns t h a t a r e
�f|
LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ A
member ol'the R e e d Elsevier p k group
I f j LEXIS-NEXIS"
1—
' ^ ^ ^ A* member of .1.- R e e d F.lievicr pic group
the O - . J m . . . . : „
A
LEXIS-NEXIS"
*
1
J Elsevier pk" group
' / 5 < ^ A member of .1
^3
thc n e e d m
R
�Page 84
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *122
f i n a n c e d t o a s u r f e i t , not j u s t f o r the 1972 Nixon Committee and i t s Watergate
appendage. n l 3 2 J u s t as a nuclear-weapons s u r f e i t w i l l l e a d a n t a g o n i s t s t o
engage i n d e s t a b i l i z i n g f i r s t - s t r i k e d i s p o s i t i o n s , so an e x c e s s i v e l y f i n a n c e d
p o l i t i c a l campaign w i l l s t a r t s u r m i s i n g what a s i m i l a r l y f i n a n c e d opponent c o u l d
do and maneuver t o p e r f o r m t h a t stratagem f i r s t i t s e l f . A l e a n e r f i n a n c i a l d i e t
would make f o r c l e a n e r and more coherent e l e c t i o n s .
- Footnotesn l 3 1 Campaign Finance Reform: Hearings Before t h e Task Force on Campaign
Finance Reform of t h e House Comm. on Admin., 102d Cong., 1 s t Sess. 46 (1991)
[ h e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform] ( t e s t i m o n y and statement o f
C u r t i s B. Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r t h e Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
n l 3 2 Developments i n the Law:
Elections,
supra note 128, a t 1236.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*123]
Again, and f i n a l l y , t h e d r a i n on t h e c a n d i d a t e ' s t i m e f o r f u n d r a i s i n g ,
whether he o r she i s an incumbent o r a c h a l l e n g e r , i s enormous under t h e p r e s e n t
system. I t c u t s h e a v i l y i n t o h i s o r her campaign t i m e and d i m i n i s h e s t h e q u a l i t y
b o t h of t h o u g h t and o f e x p r e s s i o n t h a t s h o u l d be a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e e l e c t i o n
process. There can be no v o t e r s ' mandate i f t h e r e i s no menu t o choose from, and
the freedom t o compose menus i s compromised by f u n d - r a i s i n g n e c e s s i t i e s . A l e s s
expensive campaign w i t h a s m a l l e r purse would a l l o w a l l c a n d i d a t e s t o do a
b e t t e r j o b of d e v e l o p i n g t h e i r aims and i n t e n t i o n s i n seeking p u b l i c o f f i c e .
nl33
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
n l 3 3 C a l i f o r n i a Comm'n on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , supra note 124, a t 11.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End
Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
So, a c o n s i d e r e d l i m i t a t i o n on campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s would serve
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l purposes by enhancing t h e q u a l i t y o f d i s c o u r s e between c a n d i d a t e
and v o t e r . Congress o r a s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e c o u l d choose t o make t h a t o b j e c t i v e
c l e a r by d e c l a r i n g , among t h e o b j e c t i v e s o f a new r e f o r m e f f o r t , t h a t i t wished
" ' t o f a c i l i t a t e f u l l and f r e e d i s c u s s i o n and debate,'" o r words t o t h a t e f f e c t .
nl34 Since t h e s t a t u t e would be i n t e n d e d t o serve F i r s t Amendment purposes, and
would be c a l c u l a t e d t o do so, no c o n s t i t u t i o n a l amendment would be r e q u i r e d .
nl35
- Footnotesn l 3 4 Jonathan Bingham, Democracy o r P l u t o c r a c y ? : The Case f o r a
C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Amendment t o O v e r t u r n Buckley v. Valeo, Annals Am. Acad. P o l . &
Soc. S c i . , J u l y 1986, a t 103, 113.
n l 3 5 The U.S. Senate i n May 1993 adopted a "sense o f t h e Senate" r e s o l u t i o n
c a l l i n g f o r t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l o v e r t u r n o f Buckley v. Valeo. S. Res. 380, 103d
Cong., 1 s t Sess., 139 Cong. Rec. 6623 (1993). I t s 52-43 v o t e f e l l s h o r t o f t h e
t w o - t h i r d s m a j o r i t y needed t o i n i t i a t e an amendment t o t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n . See i d .
�T
M
§)
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
^^^V
.^^^™
1
LEXIS-NEXIS
'6<^
A
member of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
" 6 ^ ^ member of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 85
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 123
a t 6640.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
IV. Remedial Process
A. L e g i s l a t i v e
Challenge
V a r i o u s s t a t e s a r e now, i n f a c t , c o n s i d e r i n g c o r r e c t i v e a c t i o n . A s t a t u t o r y c h a l l e n g e t o Bucklev v. Valeo has been approved by t h e Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e
C o u n c i l , n l 3 6 w i t h t h e support o f t h a t s t a t e ' s a t t o r n e y g e n e r a l . n l 3 7 B a l l o t
i n i t i a t i v e s t o the
[*124]
same e f f e c t a r e b e i n g r e a d i e d i n o t h e r s t a t e s , l e d
by Oregon. n l 3 8 The p e r t i n e n t committees o f t h e U.S. Congress a r e p r e p a r e d t o
t a k e s e r i o u s l y such p r o p o s a l s , i f and when t h e y a r e adopted by t h e n a t i o n a l
l e a d e r s h i p . n l 3 9 A l l t h i s i s i n keeping w i t h t h e recommendations o f t h e
C a l i f o r n i a Commission on Campaign Finance, a n o n p a r t i s a n s t u d y group. A f t e r
e i g h t years o f s e a r c h i n g e x a m i n a t i o n o f t h e problem i n our l a r g e s t s t a t e , t h a t
commission concluded t h a t :
- Footnotes-
n l 3 6 See g e n e r a l l y
Elections,
Hornet).
E l e c t i o n Reform Hearings Before t h e Wis. Assembly Comm. on
C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Law, and C o r r e c t i o n s (1994)
( t e s t i m o n y o f Roland
n l 3 7 Memorandum o f Meeting w i t h James Doyle, Wis. A t t o r n e y Gen. ( J u l y 12,
1993) (on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
n l 3 8 Memorandum f o r t h e Record by Roland Hornet (June 22, 1993) and ensuing
correspondence, "Oregon Campaign Finance Reform D i s c u s s i o n s , " (on f i l e w i t h
author).
n l 3 9 Memoranda o f c o n v e r s a t i o n s w i t h t h e S t a f f D i r e c t o r s o f t h e Senate Rules
Comm. and t h e House E l e c t i o n s Subcomm. (1992-94) (on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
-End
Footnotes-
the e f f e c t s o f huge c o n t r i b u t i o n s and h i g h one-sided spending . . . a r e
d e s t a b i l i z i n g and i n h e r e n t l y c o r r u p t i v e o f t h e democratic process. A l t h o u g h
c u r r e n t Supreme Court r u l i n g s make i t d i f f i c u l t . . . t o make any c o n c r e t e
recommendations i n t h i s area, t h e Commission . . . b e l i e v e s i t s t r o n g l y
d e s i r a b l e t o p r e s e n t t h e Court w i t h c a r e f u l l y researched data and arguments so
t h a t i t can c o n s i d e r u p h o l d i n g r e s p o n s i b l e l i m i t a t i o n s . . . . n l 4 0
- Footnotesn l 4 0 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign Finance, Democracy by I n i t i a t i v e :
C a l i f o r n i a ' s F o u r t h Branch o f Government 28 (1992).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
That i s , o f course, what a s t a t u t o r y c h a l l e n g e would
accomplish.
Shaping
�^^^^S^^TM
#i
^^^^^^V™
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
' ^ ^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
of
t h c
R c c d
Elsevier pk group
#i
^^^^^^i™
LEXIS-NEXIS
"6<^
A
member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS*
^^^A
1
mcmbcr''of - ^ — —•'•
- thc Rccd Elsevier' pk group
1
u
J
c,
�Page 86
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *124
There a r e o t h e r p o s s i b l e approaches t o t h e displacement o f Buckley v.
Valeo. One t h a t has g a i n e d a t t e n t i o n i s t o b r i n g s u i t t o i n v a l i d a t e t h e p r e s e n t ,
p o s t - B u c k l e y p a t t e r n o f l e g i s l a t i o n . The t h e o r y o f such an a c t i o n would be t h a t
a regime o f u n l i m i t e d campaign spending, w i t h i t s i n g r a i n e d f a v o r i t i s m f o r
wealthy p a r t i c i p a n t s , e n t a i l s a systematic d e n i a l o f the c i t i z e n s ' r i g h t t o cast
an equal v o t e . Equal P r o t e c t i o n d o c t r i n e and cases a p p l y i n g t h e V o t i n g R i g h t s
Act o f 1965 n l 4 1 would be c i t e d as e s t a b l i s h i n g t h a t r i g h t . n l 4 2
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl41
42 U . S . C .
section
1973
-Footnotes- - -
(1988).
nl42 Raskin & B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 320-24.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes- -
Conceding t h e p o l i t i c a l j u s t i c e o f such an argument, t h e r e a r e o b s t a c l e s i n
the way o f i t s j u d i c i a l v i n d i c a t i o n . One i s t h a t , as a c i t i z e n s ' s u i t , t h e
l i t i g a t i o n c o u l d r a i s e t h e same o r even
[*125]
tougher problems o f s t a n d i n g
and j u s t i c i a b i l i t y t h a n those mishandled by t h e Supreme Court i n Buckley v.
Valeo. n l 4 3 Another, more t a c t i c a l d i f f i c u l t y i s t h a t t h e p l a i n t i f f s i n such
proceedings would be a s k i n g t h e Supreme Court t o h o l d u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l t h e v e r y
s t a t u t e t h a t i t i n e f f e c t c r e a t e d , when i t decided what would s u r v i v e i n t h e
1974 s t a t u t e and what would n o t . I t i s always h a r d e r , o r s h o u l d be, t o argue
a g a i n s t c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y t h a n i n f a v o r - - a n d here, a p r i d e o f j u d i c i a l
a u t h o r s h i p c o u l d make i t p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl43 The proponents o f t h i s approach a c c o r d i n g l y f a v o r a " s a l a m i - s l i c e "
s e r i e s o f s u i t s , c h a l l e n g i n g successive p a r t s o f t h e p r e s e n t campaign-finance
system w i t h a view t o changing j u d i c i a l p e r s p e c t i v e s over t i m e . Raskin &
B o n i f a z , supra note 2, a t 331.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The r i s k o f an i l l - f o u n d e d s u i t i s o f course t h a t i t c o u l d p r e c i p i t a t e an
e a r l y , and damaging, l o s s . G e t t i n g a l e g i s l a t u r e on t h e s i d e o f t h e
complainants, b e f o r e j o i n i n g s u i t , might t a k e more t i m e , b u t i t s h o u l d g r e a t l y
s t r e n g t h e n t h e chances o f p r e v a i l i n g . For l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and
d e c l a r a t i o n s o f purpose, when r e a s o n a b l y supported, a r e e n t i t l e d t o j u d i c i a l
r e s p e c t f o r t h e purpose o f reexamining c o n s t i t u t i o n a l d e c i s i o n s . n l 4 4
- Footnotesnl44
Glidden
Co.
v.
Zdanok,
370
U.S.
530,
541-43
(1962)
(Harlan,
plurality opinion). This view was adopted by majorities in Texas
410 U.S.
381-82
702,
711
(1969).
(1973)
and Red Lion Broadcasting
-End
Footnotes-
Co.
v.
FCC,
J.;
v.
395
Louisiana,
U.S.
367,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I n t h e campaign f i n a n c e arena i n p a r t i c u l a r , l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s have been
�§|" LEXIS-NEXIS
-£—J
1
L .
I.
- ^ ^ A k. member of -thc D I C l
Reed Elsevier pk. group
-
| S | LEXIS-NEXIS
^ " ^ ^
~^5^AA
mcm
_ l . L _ D - - J 171
._
t >Ic r of. -the Reed Elsevier pk group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS*
^ " ^ ^
I
i" 1 _
_
'A^_ ^J A 1 member of .thc D I 1 I
Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 87
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 125
r e c o g n i z e d as c a r r y i n g p e r s u a s i v e w e i g h t . I n F i r s t N a t i o n a l Bank v. B e l l o t t i ,
n l 4 5 where t h e argument was pressed t h a t c o r p o r a t e f i n a n c i a l involvement can
d i s t o r t e l e c t i o n s , t h e Court n o t e d t h a t t h e r e were no " r e c o r d o r l e g i s l a t i v e
f i n d i n g s " t o s u p p o r t t h a t argument; had t h e r e been some, t h e Court s a i d , t h e y
would have m e r i t e d c o n s i d e r a t i o n . n l 4 6 Four years l a t e r , i n FEC v. N a t i o n a l
R i g h t t o Work Committee, t h e Court e x p l i c i t l y accepted l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s on
matters o f p o l i t i c a l f a c t . nl47
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl45
435 U.S.
765
(1978).
nl46 Bellotti, 435 U.S.
n l 4 7 459
U.S.
197,
-Footnotes- -
at
209-10
788-89.
(1982).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
The s t a t u t o r y a d o p t i o n o f expanded r e g u l a t o r y r a t i o n a l e s s h o u l d f u r t h e r
c o n t r i b u t e t o a changed j u d i c i a l p e r s p e c t i v e . As p r e v i o u s l y noted, t h e o p i n i o n
i n Buckley v. Valeo made c l e a r t h a t c o r r u p t i o n was t h e o n l y r a t i o n a l e r e c i t e d by
Congress f o r
[*126]
i t s 1974 r e s t r i c t i o n s on campaign f i n a n c e . n l 4 8 That
was u n d e r s t a n d a b l e , g i v e n t h e Watergate p r e o c c u p a t i o n s o f t h e t i m e . n l 4 9 By
c l e a r i m p l i c a t i o n , however, t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l balance remained open t o t h e
i n v o c a t i o n o f w i d e r purposes.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n l 4 8 See supra, p a r t
-Footnotes- -
III.D.
n l 4 9 See g e n e r a l l y W i n t e r , supra note 15.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
T h i s much i s suggested a l s o by a p a r a l l e l course o f d e c i s i o n s i n Oregon.
Deras v. Myers, n l 5 0 t o b e g i n w i t h , was decided t h e year b e f o r e Buckley and
conformably w i t h i t . Deras i n v o l v e d a s t a t e s t a t u t e f i x i n g l i m i t s on campaign
e x p e n d i t u r e s , c h a l l e n g e d under p r o v i s i o n s o f t h e Oregon C o n s t i t u t i o n t h a t a r e
e f f e c t i v e l y i d e n t i c a l t o those i n t h e F i r s t Amendment's f r e e speech and assembly
c l a u s e s . n l 5 1 Once a g a i n t h e r e were no r e c o r d o r l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s t o s u s t a i n
t h e n e c e s s i t y f o r t h e r e s t r i c t i o n : "There i s no evidence i n t h i s case, n o r any
data i n t h e s t u d i e s on campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s d i s c o v e r e d i n o u r r e s e a r c h , which
would l e a d t o t h e c o n c l u s i o n t h a t our system o f government i s i m p e r i l e d by t h e
f r e e e x p e n d i t u r e o f funds i n p o l i t i c a l campaigns." n l 5 2 The Oregon Supreme Court
thereupon i n v a l i d a t e d t h e s t a t u t e , w i t h b r o a d l y sweeping c o n c e p t u a l
pronouncements about t h e i m p e r a t i v e s o f freedom i n f i n a n c i n g campaigns.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl50
535 P.2d
541
(Or.
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
1975).
n l 5 1 I d . a t 542 ( c i t i n g Or. Const, a r t . I , s e c t i o n s 8, 2 6 ) .
n l 5 2 I d . a t 545.
�W
T
M
^^^^^^S7
I LEXIS-NEXIS
#4
§
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd tlscvicr pk group
^^^V
.^^^ ™
LEXIS-NEXIS-
^^^^A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Klsevier pk group
*
1
c
D
"
J
1:1
-—-'-
#i
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ j J ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Klsevier pic group
^
*
L
*'.t.-i>— J ci
1
�Page 88
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 126
-End
Footnotes-
F i f t e e n years l a t e r , however, a s l i g h t change o f p e r c e i v e d r a t i o n a l e
produced a v e r y d i f f e r e n t r e s u l t . I n r e Fadeley n l 5 3 a g a i n concerned a r e s t r a i n t
on e l e c t i o n f i n a n c e s , t h i s t i m e as a p p l i e d t o a supreme c o u r t j u s t i c e charged
w i t h improper campaign conduct. Now t h e o t h e r j u s t i c e s were a b l e t o assess
f i r s t h a n d , from t h e i r own e x p e r i e n c e , t h e importance o f p r o t e c t i n g t h e i n t e g r i t y
of o f f i c i a l conduct. The c o u r t d i d n o t f i n d Deras and Buckley c o n t r o l l i n g :
" P o l i t i c a l e x p r e s s i o n i s a t t h e h e a r t o f t h e v a l u e s expressed i n t h e F i r s t
Amendment. However, even i n t h e most s e n s i t i v e area o f p u b l i c d i s c o u r s e , n o t
every law and r e g u l a t i o n l i m i t i n g speech i s u n c o n s t i t u t i o n a l . " n l 5 4 Unable t o
c a r r y t h e day, two members o f t h e c o u r t f i l e d a l e n g t h y , r i g i d ,
[*127]
i d e o l o g i c a l d i s s e n t , n l 5 5 b u t t h i s t i m e i t d i d n o t c a r r y t h e day. For t h e c o u r t
as a whole saw t h e q u e s t i o n as b e i n g "whether t h e o f f s e t t i n g s o c i e t a l
i n t e r e s t - - w h e t h e r d e r i v e d from t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n o r from some o t h e r s o u r c e - - i s o f
fundamental importance t o a degree a k i n t o t h e concerns expressed i n t h e
c o n s t i t u t i o n . " n l 5 6 Upholding p u b l i c c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e i n t e g r i t y o f government
i s one such v a l u e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl53
802
P.2d
31
(Or.
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1990).
n l 5 4 I d . a t 41 ( c i t a t i o n o m i t t e d ) .
nl55 Id. at 46-65
(Unis, J., concurring in part, dissenting in part).
nl56 Id. at 40.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
B. J u d i c i a l Argument
F e l i x F r a n k f u r t e r ' s 1924 i n s i s t e n c e t h a t " t h e s t u f f o f [ c o n s t i t u t i o n a l ]
c o n t e s t s a r e f a c t s , and judgment upon f a c t s " n l 5 7 was b u t t r e s s e d by a s t r i n g o f
i l l u s t r a t i v e cases, headed by two w i t h outcomes t h a t were a t v a r i a n c e w i t h each
o t h e r . These were Lochner v. New York, n l 5 8 which d e c l a r e d a l l r e s t r i c t i o n s on
w o r k i n g hours t o be an i m p e r m i s s i b l e i n t e r f e r e n c e w i t h t h e l i b e r t y o f c o n t r a c t ,
and M u l l e r v. Oregon, n l 5 9 which u p h e l d such r e s t r i c t i o n s when shown t o be
reasonable. The lawyer r e s p o n s i b l e f o r p r o c u r i n g t h i s d i v e r g e n c e was
F r a n k f u r t e r ' s predecessor and mentor, L o u i s Dembitz Brandeis--a b r i l l i a n t
advocate a t t h e b a r b e f o r e he became a J u s t i c e .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
nl57 Frankfurter, supra note 1, at 1002.
198
U.S.
45
nl59 208
U.S.
412
nl58
(1905).
(1908).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Oregon had adopted a 10-hour l i m i t on i n d u s t r i a l work by women. Brandeis
�I LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pit group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
" ^ J ^
member of'the Reed Elsevier pic group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS"
" ^ ^ ^ member of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 89
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *127
sought t o a v o i d t h e Lochner condemnation o f such l i m i t s , and t o show t h e
reasonableness o f t h e Oregon law, by drawing on g e n e r a l knowledge and common
u n d e r s t a n d i n g o u t s i d e t h e covers o f t h e law books. n l 6 0 Working w i t h h i s
s i s t e r - i n - l a w , Josephine Goldmark, he mustered a s m a l l army o f r e s e a r c h e r s who
combed t h e Columbia U n i v e r s i t y L i b r a r y , t h e New York P u b l i c L i b r a r y , and t h e
L i b r a r y o f Congress. n l 6 l
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl60 Id. at
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
415-16.
nl61 Ronald K. L. Collins & Jennifer Frieson, Looking Back on Muller v.
Oregon, 69 A.B.A.
J. 294, 296-97
(1983).
-End
Footnotes-
What t h e y produced was a new k i n d o f a p p e l l a t e b r i e f , c o n t a i n i n g two pages
of law and dozens o f pages o f f a c t s - - a s d e p i c t e d i n r e p o r t s by p h y s i c i a n s ,
s o c i o l o g i s t s , c r i m i n o l o g i s t s , and e x p e r t s i n housing and hygiene. n l 6 2 These
c a r r i e d t h e day.
[*128]
J u s t i c e Brewer, w r i t i n g f o r a unanimous Supreme
Court, s u s t a i n e d t h e Oregon law, drawing on t h e Brandeis b r i e f by name f o r i t s
c o l l e c t i o n o f laws and r e p o r t s showing dangers t o women and d i m i n u t i o n s o f
p r o d u c t i v i t y a r i s i n g from o v e r l y l o n g hours o f work. These m a t e r i a l s , w h i l e n o t
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l a u t h o r i t i e s , were " s i g n i f i c a n t o f a widespread b e l i e f " i n t h e
n e c e s s i t y f o r such l e g i s l a t i o n . J u s t i c e Brewer c o n t i n u e d :
-Footnotesnl62 Id.; see also Julius Cohen, The Labor-Welfare Cases: A Socio-Legal
Approach, 10 U. Chi. L. Rev. 375, 378-80
(1943).
-End
Footnotes-
When a q u e s t i o n o f f a c t i s debated and d e b a t a b l e , and t h e e x t e n t t o which a
s p e c i a l c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i m i t a t i o n goes i s a f f e c t e d by t h e t r u t h i n r e s p e c t t o
t h a t f a c t , a widespread and l o n g c o n t i n u e d b e l i e f c o n c e r n i n g i t i s worthy o f
c o n s i d e r a t i o n . We t a k e j u d i c i a l cognizance o f a l l m a t t e r s o f g e n e r a l knowledge.
nl63
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl63 M u l l e r ,
208 U.S. a t
-Footnotes- -
420-21.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
That i n v i t a t i o n s h o u l d a p p l y as w e l l t o a r e v i e w o f campaign f i n a n c i n g
legislation.
I n t h e M u l l e r case, t h e f a c t u a l p r e s e n t a t i o n was l e a n and s i m p l e . n l 6 4 I t
i n c l u d e d a r e c i t a t i o n o f laws, b o t h s t a t e and f o r e i g n , showing how i n d u s t r i a l
democracies had viewed t h e need f o r c u r t a i l m e n t o f women's work hours. I t
o f f e r e d an o u t l i n e o f experience, a b s t r a c t i n g t h e e s s e n t i a l s o f l e g i s l a t i v e
h e a r i n g s and debates, h i s t o r i e s and handbooks, s t a t i s t i c s and r e p o r t s by
i n d u s t r i a l and medical commissions, a u t h o r s and i n v e s t i g a t o r s , and o t h e r s . These
�) LEXIS-NEXIS'
^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS
4
-^-^ A
^ ^
1
f ihe — i I . . . . :
1,
mcmbcr of- ^ - oReed LElsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS
. -Z^U ^ A mcmbcr of .k. Reed ci....:
1
.• thc
,.
J *
Elsevier pk- group
�Page 90
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 128
were arranged c o h e r e n t l y under o u t l i n e headings such as "Dangers," " B e n e f i t s , "
and "Reasonableness." The p r e s e n t a t i o n proved e f f e c t i v e .
-Footnotesnl64 See Brief for Defendant in Error, Muller,
208 U.S. at 412, reprinted in
Louis D. Brandeis & Josephine Goldmark, Women in Industry 10 (1969) and also
summarized in Muller, 208 U.S. at 419-20
n.l.
-End
Footnotes-
The Brandeis b r i e f , as i t came t o be known, n l 6 5 emerged as a weapon a g a i n s t
t h e r i g i d i d e o l o g i c a l dogma o f " l i b e r t y o f c o n t r a c t , " a concept nowhere
expressed i n t h e C o n s t i t u t i o n i t s e l f , and e v e n t u a l l y abandoned--but o n l y a f t e r
the t h r e a t o f F r a n k l i n Roosevelt's C o u r t - p a c k i n g p l a n persuaded one J u s t i c e t o
s h i f t over i n f a v o r o f o v e r r u l i n g Lochner v. New York. n l 6 6
- Footnotesnl65 For a detailed discussion of the "Brandeis Brief," see Bernard Schwartz,
Supreme Court Superstars: The Ten Greatest Justices, 31 Tulsa L.J.
93,
122-23
(1995).
n l 6 6 For a h i s t o r y o f t h e C o u r t - p a c k i n g p l a n , see Robert H. Jackson,
S t r u g g l e f o r J u d i c i a l Supremacy v i - v i i i , 187-92 (1941).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*129]
-End Footnotes-
The
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I n i t s own day, w i t h t h e c o m p o s i t i o n o f t h e Court as i t t h e n was, t h e r e was
no chance t h a t any argument would persuade t h e J u s t i c e s t o j e t t i s o n " l i b e r t y o f
c o n t r a c t . " The Brandeis b r i e f had t o accept t h a t p r e v a i l i n g d o c t r i n e , and argue
w i t h i n i t s c o n f i n e s . T h i s Brandeis d i d s u c c e s s f u l l y : The judgment o f t h e Court
i n M u l l e r v, Oregon was t h a t " f o r these reasons, and w i t h o u t q u e s t i o n i n g i n any
r e s p e c t t h e d e c i s i o n i n Lochner v. New York, . . . t h e judgment o f t h e Supreme
Court o f Oregon i s a f f i r m e d . " n l 6 7
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - nl67 Muller,
208
U.S.
at
-Footnotes- -
423.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
That avenue i s open, and may be necessary, t o g a i n r e l i e f from t h e e q u a l l y
i d e o l o g i c a l c o n f i n e s o f Buckley v. Valeo. n l 6 8 Perhaps t h e o r i e n t a t i o n o f t h e
Supreme Court's emerging m a j o r i t y has changed, o r i s changing, s u f f i c i e n t l y t o
p e r m i t an o v e r r u l i n g o f t h a t d e c i s i o n ; perhaps n o t . n l 6 9 A sound l i t i g a t i n g
s t r a t e g y w i l l be a t t e n t i v e t o b o t h p o s s i b i l i t i e s .
- Footnotesn l 6 8 A t l e a s t one o t h e r commentator has found t h e comparison p e r s u a s i v e . See
David Cole, F i r s t Amendment A n t i t r u s t : The End o f L a i s s e z - F a i r e i n Campaign
Finance, 9 Yale L. & Pol'y Rev. 236, 271-72 (1991).
�f|~ LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
f p LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^^A
member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
%t LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ • J ^ A member of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
�Page 91
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 129
n l 6 9 The New York Times may t a k e t h e former view, see supra note 16, b u t
Common Cause takes t h e l a t t e r . L e t t e r from Fred Wertheimer, P r e s i d e n t o f Common
Cause, Apr. 25, 1994 (on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) . Bucklev i s now t w e n t y years o l d , o f
course, whereas Lochner had been decided o n l y two years b e f o r e M u l l e r .
-End
Footnotes-
I t i s u n f o r t u n a t e t o have t o say so, b u t i n r e c e n t years t h e Supreme Court
champions o f f r e e speech have managed t o wrap i t i n dogmatic c l o t h i n g t h a t
s t i f l e s t h e c i r c u l a t i o n o f ideas and e x p r e s s i o n . That e f f e c t can be shown, i n
any g i v e n case, by f a c t u a l d i s t i n c t i o n s t h a t escape t h e reach o f Buckley w i t h o u t
n e c e s s a r i l y o v e r r u l i n g i t . I t can a l s o be shown, by p o l i c y and l e g a l as w e l l as
f a c t u a l documentation, i n a way t h a t undermines t h e c o n t i n u i n g v a l i d i t y o f t h a t
d e c i s i o n . Good l a w y e r s , l i k e L o u i s Brandeis, w i l l know how t o argue such
o p p o r t u n i t i e s i n the a l t e r n a t i v e .
[*130]
Appendices
A. Sample L e g i s l a t i o n *
* T h i s sample b i l l i s adapted from Wisconsin Assembly B i l l 1167 (1994),
i n t r o d u c e d by R e p r e s e n t a t i v e Peter Bock and (as a Senate c o u n t e r p a r t ) by
Senator David Helbach--the v i c e chairman and chairman, r e s p e c t i v e l y , o f t h e
Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e C o u n c i l ' s S p e c i a l Committee on Campaign F i n a n c i n g . See
Roland Hornet, Memorandum from t h e a u t h o r t o t h e Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e Reference
Bureau (Feb. 24, 1994); see a l s o E l e c t i o n Reform Hearings Before t h e Wisconsin
Assembly Comm., supra note 180 ( t e s t i m o n y o f Roland Hornet).
S e c t i o n 1. T h i s s t a t u t e may be c i t e d as the Campaign E x p e n d i t u r e L i m i t a t i o n
Act.
S e c t i o n 2. FINDINGS OF FACT. The l e g i s l a t u r e , drawing on i t s c o l l e c t i v e
experience w i t h campaigns f o r p u b l i c o f f i c e and on t h e independent evidence
p r e s e n t e d t o i t by q u a l i f i e d a n a l y s t s , f i n d s and d e c l a r e s t h a t :
( I ) T h i s s t a t e has h i s t o r i c a l l y e x p e r i e n c e d a h i g h l e v e l o f c i v i c
p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n r e s p o n s i b l e government which, however, i s now i n d e c l i n e as t h e
d i r e c t r e s u l t o f campaign f i n a n c i n g arrangements t h a t have t h e c l e a r tendency t o
d i s t a n c e v o t e r s from t h e e l e c t o r a l process, and t h a t are c o n s t r a i n e d from
c o r r e c t i o n by a p p l i c a b l e r u l i n g s o f t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme Court.
( I I ) C u r r e n t campaign f i n a n c i n g arrangements, w i t h t h e i r p e r c e i v e d
p r e f e r e n t i a l access t o lawmakers f o r s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s capable o f c o n t r i b u t i n g
s i z a b l e sums t o lawmakers' campaigns, have provoked p u b l i c d i s a f f e c t i o n w i t h
e l e c t i v e government, as m a n i f e s t e d by d e c l i n e s i n v o t i n g percentages and i n
voluntary tax-check-off p a r t i c i p a t i o n .
( I I I ) The s t a t e ' s c h e c k - o f f system has l o s t p o p u l a r s u p p o r t because i t does
not d i m i n i s h t h e p e r c e i v e d p r e f e r e n t i a l access o f t h e s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s and i s
t h e r e f o r e judged t o be i n e f f e c t i v e .
(IV) Before 1976, t h i s s t a t e , a l o n g w i t h 33 o t h e r s t a t e s , had these m a t t e r s
under r e g u l a t o r y c o n t r o l t h r o u g h a system o f mandatory spending l i m i t s
�H i LEXIS-NEXIS'
member ot the Rccd Elsevier pk group
%t LEXIS-NEXIS
1
^
• . - - * - . » Reed _ . . : _ _ _ pk
^ ^ ^ A member _of- .rhe „ . . . - . .Elsevier , group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS"
i ^ »
- ^O ^ A mcmbcr _ f .rhe .Reed c , _ _ , _ . _, group
of . . . . j Elsevier pk
L
�Page 92
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97,
*130
a p p l i c a b l e t o a l l candidates f o r s t a t e e l e c t i v e o f f i c e .
[*131]
(V) The U n i t e d S t a t e s Supreme Court, i n B u c k l e y v. Valeo, 424 U.S. 1 (1976),
i n v a l i d a t e d a l l such spending l i m i t s w h i l e a p p r o v i n g campaign c o n t r i b u t i o n
limits.
(VI) Since t h a t t i m e , campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s have r i s e n s t e e p l y , d o u b l i n g i n
t h i s s t a t e ' s l e g i s l a t i v e races s i n c e 1980. The a d d i t i o n has been made up
p r i n c i p a l l y by c o n t r i b u t i o n s from s p e c i a l i n t e r e s t s .
( V I I ) C o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s are inadequate by themselves t o check t h i s t r e n d .
As l o n g as spending i s e f f e c t i v e l y u n r e s t r a i n e d , c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i l l f i n d ways t o
p r o t e c t f a v o r e d candidates from b e i n g o u t s p e n t .
( V I I I ) Among such ways have been p e r s o n a l spending by w e a l t h y c a n d i d a t e s ,
independent e x p e n d i t u r e s t h a t f a v o r o r oppose an i d e n t i f i e d c a n d i d a t e , and t h e
use o f p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s as c o n d u i t s f o r t h e support o f s e l e c t e d c a n d i d a t e s .
(IX) Experience shows i n p a r t i c u l a r t h a t s o - c a l l e d "independent"
support--whether by i n d i v i d u a l s , committees, o r o t h e r e n t i t i e s - - c a n be
c o o r d i n a t e d w i t h a c a n d i d a t e ' s campaign, by means o f i n f o r m a l "understandings,"
w i t h o u t l o s i n g i t s p r o f e s s e d l y independent c h a r a c t e r . L i k e w i s e , c o n t r i b u t i o n s t o
a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y , o s t e n s i b l y f o r " p a r t y - b u i l d i n g " purposes, can be and are
r o u t e d , by d e s i g n , t o t h e support of i d e n t i f i e d c a n d i d a t e s .
(X) P u b l i c f i n a n c i n g cannot cure t h e problem so l o n g as spending l i m i t s are
so r e a d i l y evadable. A f t e r f i f t e e n years o f experience w i t h t h e p r e s e n t law, and
a f o r t y - t w o p e r c e n t d e c l i n e i n t a x c h e c k - o f f c o n t r i b u t i o n s , i t has become
e v i d e n t t h a t t h i s s t a t e ' s v o t e r s a w a i t some s u c c e s s f u l r e p a i r o f t h e campaign
f i n a n c e system b e f o r e t h e y w i l l g i v e i t t h e i r f i n a n c i a l s u p p o r t .
(XI) The l e g i s l a t u r e agrees w i t h t h e 1992 f i n d i n g of t h e C a l i f o r n i a
Commission on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , made a f t e r e i g h t years of s t u d y , t h a t an
e f f e c t i v e remedy t o t h i s problem r e q u i r e s t h e r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n o f Bucklev v.
Valeo. We b e l i e v e w i t h t h a t commission t h a t i t i s " s t r o n g l y d e s i r a b l e t o p r e s e n t
the Supreme Court w i t h c a r e f u l l y researched data and arguments so t h a t i t can
c o n s i d e r u p h o l d i n g reasonable spending l i m i t a t i o n s . " T h i s a c t i s i n t e n d e d t o
serve t h a t purpose.
( X I I ) The Supreme Court based i t s Bucklev d e c i s i o n on a concern t h a t
spending l i m i t s c o u l d r e s t r i c t p o l i t i c a l speech, "by r e s t r i c t i n g t h e number o f
issues d i s c u s s e d , t h e
[*132]
depth of t h e i r e x p l o r a t i o n , and t h e s i z e o f t h e
audience reached." The experience o f those engaged i n t h e e l e c t o r a l process i s
o t h e r w i s e . I t i s u n l i m i t e d e x p e n d i t u r e t h a t can drown o r d i s t o r t p o l i t i c a l
discourse i n a f l o o d of d i s t r a c t i v e r e p e t i t i o n .
( X I I I ) The l e a s t d i s t o r t e d and most i n s t r u c t i v e channels o f campaign
communication are o f t e n f r e e o r i n e x p e n s i v e : debates, c a l l - i n programs, l o c a l
i n t e r v i e w s , and o t h e r v o t e r c o n n e c t i o n s t h a t are n o t dependent on t h e power o f
money.
(XIV) The expanded use of such low-cost channels, s t i m u l a t e d by t h e a d o p t i o n
of s e n s i b l e spending l i m i t s , w i l l b e n e f i t p o l i t i c a l d i s c o u r s e by drawing
c a n d i d a t e s out of t h e packaged w o r l d o f media a d v e r t i s e m e n t s and i n t o t h e r e a l
�^
LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
f p LEXIS-NEXIS'
member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS*
'^<^
A
member of the Reed Elsevier pit group
�Page 93
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 132
w o r l d of v o t e r engagement and
accountability.
(XV) T u r n i n g down the n o i s e l e v e l o f campaign communication t h r o u g h
reasonable spending l i m i t s w i l l a l s o i n c r e a s e t h e o p p o r t u n i t y f o r newer and
q u i e t e r v o i c e s t o be heard. I t w i l l t e n d t o i n c r e a s e t h e number, depth, and
d i v e r s i t y of ideas p r e s e n t e d t o t h e p u b l i c .
(XVI) F i n a l l y , a reasonable l i m i t on campaign spending w i l l r e l i e v e
c a n d i d a t e s and o f f i c e h o l d e r s a l i k e from the c o n s t a n t n e c e s s i t y o f engaging i n
d e f e n s i v e f u n d - r a i s i n g , a r i s i n g as t h i s does from t h e c o n t i n u a l r i s k o f
m a s s i v e l y f i n a n c e d o p p o s i t i o n c h a l l e n g e s t o e v e r y t h i n g t h e y may say o r do. The
conduct o f b o t h campaigns and o f f i c e h o l d e r s w i l l t h e r e b y be improved.
S e c t i o n 3. DECLARATION OF PURPOSES. The purposes o f t h i s c h a p t e r are t o :
( I ) Restore t h e p u b l i c c o n f i d e n c e i n , and t h e i n t e g r i t y o f , t h e democratic
system i n t h i s s t a t e ;
( I I ) S t r e n g t h e n and promote f u l l and f r e e campaign d i s c u s s i o n and
debate;
( I I I ) R e l i e v e e l e c t i v e o f f i c e - s e e k e r s and o f f i c e - h o l d e r s from t h e
l i m i t a t i o n s on p u r p o s i v e p o l i t i c a l conduct and d i s c o u r s e t h a t can a r i s e
excessive a t t e n t i o n t o f u n d - r a i s i n g ; and
from
(IV) Reduce c o r r u p t i o n and undue i n f l u e n c e , o r t h e appearance t h e r e o f ,
the f i n a n c i n g o f s t a t e e l e c t i o n campaigns.
S e c t i o n 4. OPERATIONAL PROVISIONS
( I ) Mandatory Spending L i m i t s
in
[*133]
(a) The disbursement l i m i t a t i o n s p e c i f i e d elsewhere i n t h i s a c t f o r e l e c t i o n
t o any o f f i c e s h a l l serve as an o v e r a l l c e i l i n g on disbursements made, and
o b l i g a t i o n s i n c u r r e d , by:
( i ) t h e c a n d i d a t e and h i s o r her p e r s o n a l campaign committee,
p e r s o n a l resources o r from p u b l i c o r p r i v a t e c o n t r i b u t i o n s ; and
whether from
( i i ) a p o l i t i c a l p a r t y committee, t o t h e e x t e n t t h a t i t i d e n t i f i a b l y
advocates t h e e l e c t i o n o f t h e c a n d i d a t e o r the d e f e a t o f any o f h i s o r her
opponents.
(b) The c a n d i d a t e and h i s o r her p e r s o n a l campaign committee s h a l l be
r e s p o n s i b l e f o r compliance w i t h t h i s o v e r a l l c e i l i n g .
held
(c) Any o t h e r i n d i v i d u a l o r committee t h a t makes a disbursement o r i n c u r s an
o b l i g a t i o n t o advocate t h e e l e c t i o n o r d e f e a t o f a c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d c a n d i d a t e
s h a l l be l i m i t e d f o r t h i s purpose t o disbursements o r o b l i g a t i o n s t o t a l i n g n o t
more t h a n $ 500. T h i s l i m i t a t i o n s h a l l n o t a p p l y t o disbursements o r o b l i g a t i o n s
made o r i n c u r r e d i n t h e o r d i n a r y course o f business by t h e independent news
media, nor t o i n t e r n a l communications between an o r g a n i z a t i o n and i t s members.
(II) Inseverability
(a) I f any p a r t of t h i s a c t i s found o r h e l d t o be i n v a l i d , a l l o f i t s
�) LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
#|
LEXIS-NEXIS'6<^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o t
~
t h c
R c c d
Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS"
' ^ ^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 94
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 133
p r o v i s i o n s s h a l l thereupon t e r m i n a t e and cease t o have e f f e c t .
B. Specimen J u d i c i a l
I.
[*134]
Brief
STATEMENT OF THE LAW
(A) Political campaign expenditures are a form of constitutionally protected
speech. Buckley
v. Valeo,
424 U.S. 1
(1976).
(B) But reasonably justified restrictions are permitted. Buckley
424 U.S. at 95, 107-08;
Republican
N a f l Comm. v. FEC, 487 F. Supp.
(S.D.N.Y.), aff'd, 445 U.S. 955
(1980).
v.
280
Valeo,
(C) Newly presented facts may justify a previously disallowed restriction.
Planned Parenthood v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833, 854 (1992);
see also Muller v.
Oregon, 208 CJ.S. 412, 420-21 (1908).
(D) Expanded purposes may likewise justify
such restrictions. Buckley,
424 U.S. at 26-27,
45, 53; FEC v.
National
Conservative
Political
Action
Comm., 470 U.S. 480, 496-97
(1985).
Compare Deras
v. Meyers,
535 P.2d 541 (Or. 1975) with In re Fadeley, 802 P.2d 31 (Or.
1990).
(E) L e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s o f f a c t and d e c l a r a t i o n s o f purpose, s u p p o r t e d by a
c o n s i d e r e d body o f i n f o r m e d o p i n i o n , a r e e n t i t l e d f o r these purposes t o r e s p e c t .
G l i d d e n Co. v . Zdanok, 370 U.S. 530 (1962); M u l l e r v . Oregon, 208 U.S. 412
(1908). Compare F i r s t N a t ' l Bank v . B e l l o t t i , 435 U.S. 765, 789 (1978) (absence
of l e g i s l a t i v e f i n d i n g s ) w i t h FEC v. N a t i o n a l R i g h t t o Work Comm., 459 U.S. 197,
209-10 (1982) ( l e g i s l a t i v e judgments on m a t t e r s o f p o l i t i c a l f a c t e n t i t l e d t o
respect).
I I . STATEMENT OF FACTS
(A) Adverse E f f e c t s o f U n l i m i t e d Campaign E x p e n d i t u r e s
1. I n t h e f i r s t t w e l v e years a f t e r 1976, when Buckley v. Valeo was decided,
t o t a l spending by c a n d i d a t e s f o r s t a t e e l e c t i v e o f f i c e s o f a l l k i n d s i n c r e a s e d
by 450 p e r c e n t , n l
- Footnotesn l H e r b e r t E. Alexander, Reform and R e a l i t y : t h e F i n a n c i n g o f S t a t e and L o c a l
Campaigns 7 (1991) .
-End
Footnotes-
2. Congressional campaign e x p e n d i t u r e s from 1974 t o 1990 rose a comparable
600 p e r c e n t , o r 300 p e r c e n t i n c o n s t a n t d o l [*135]
l a r s . n2 I n 1974, t h e
average c o s t o f a w i n n i n g House race was $ 52,000; by 1992 t h e c o s t had reached
$ 555,000, f a r above t h e i n f l a t i o n - a d j u s t e d l e v e l o f $ 152,000. n3
- Footnotesn2 Campaign Finance Reform: Hearings Before t h e Task Force on Campaign
Finance Reform o f t h e House Comm. on Admin., 102d Cong., 1 s t Sess. 59 (1991)
[ h e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform] ( t e s t i m o n y and statement o f
C u r t i s B. Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r t h e Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
�I LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS
'6<^
A
mcmbcr of rhe Rccd F.lscvier pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS
6<^
A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pli group
�Page 95
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 135
n3 E l l e n S. M i l l e r , Remarks t o a F i r s t Amendment C o n s u l t a t i o n (Apr. 19,
1993). Ms. M i l l e r i s t h e E x e c u t i v e D i r e c t o r o f t h e Center f o r Responsible
P o l i t i c s , which produced a d e t a i l e d r e p o r t on t h e s p i r a l i n g c o s t o f
c o n g r e s s i o n a l e l e c t i o n s between 1974 and 1986. See Center f o r Responsible
P o l i t i c s , Money and P o l i t i c s : Spending i n Congressional E l e c t i o n s : A
Never-Ending S p i r a l (1988) .
-End
Footnotes-
3. The i n c r e a s e i n e l e c t i o n f u n d i n g has been funded v e r y l a r g e l y by
i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s ; i n c o n g r e s s i o n a l campaigns, where d e t a i l e d r e c o r d s are k e p t ,
d i s i n t e r e s t e d and p u b l i c - i n t e r e s t c o n t r i b u t o r s have been o u t s p e n t by r a t i o s o f
20:1 and more, w i t h the i n t e r e s t e d money g o i n g o v e r w h e l m i n g l y t o p o l i t i c a l
incumbents, n o t c h a l l e n g e r s , r e g a r d l e s s o f p o l i t i c a l p h i l o s o p h y . n4
- Footnotesn4 Center f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s , supra note 3, a t 21-35. The phenomenon
h o l d s t r u e i n s t a t e e l e c t i o n campaigns as w e l l . Common Cause, Campaign Finance
r e f o r m i n t h e S t a t e s 6-7 (1985).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4. The impact o f i n t e r e s t e d money on incumbent b e h a v i o r i s s i g n i f i c a n t ,
p a r t i c u l a r l y as regards complex o r l o w - p r o f i l e i s s u e s t h a t t h e press does n o t
f o l l o w i n d e t a i l . n5
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n5 Senator B i l l S c h l u t e r , Remarks t o t h e Nationwide C o u n c i l on Government
E t h i c s Laws (Sept. 20, 1993).
-End
Footnotes-
5. As campaign spending has gone up, v o t i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n has gone down. n6
I t stands today a t t h e l o w e s t l e v e l o f any democracy i n t h e w o r l d . More t h a n 2 0
m i l l i o n Buckley-era v o t e r s now r e g u l a r l y s t a y home. n7
- Footnotesn6 David B. Magleby & Candice J. Nelson, The Money Chase: C o n g r e s s i o n a l
Campaign Finance Reform 41-42 (1990).
n7 Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform, supra n o t e 2, a t 59.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
6. America d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d has a l s o e x p e r i e n c e d a sharp d e c l i n e i n census
p a r t i c i p a t i o n and i n v o l u n t a r y t a x compliance. n8 The d e l i b e r a t e u n d e r - r e p o r t i n g
o f income t o t h e I n t e r n a l Revenue S e r v i c e i s s a i d t o have r i s e n from two p e r c e n t
i n 1940
t*136]
t o t h i r t y p e r c e n t i n 1985 n9 --a l o n g way from J u s t i c e O l i v e r
Wendell Holmes' o b s e r v a t i o n t h a t "taxes are what I pay f o r c i v i l i z a t i o n . "
�§I
LEXIS-NEXIS'
.L-~J
I
..r
- ^ ^ Aa mcmbcr of -1_ _ Rccd c i
thc • -J Elsevier _ i . group
pk
^^ ™
^^
^K
^^^^
^^^
# i LEXIS-NEXIS" # i LEXIS-NEXIS"
a
^j^A
I
n
i ri
_ i .
_._
member of the Rccd F.lscvier pic group
^ " ^ ^
# U
-^^A
i
•
_ir.i_. W I - ^ J ri
_ i .
_
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 96
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 136
- Footnotesn8 Paul V o l c k e r , The Endangered C i v i l S e r v i c e , N.Y. Times, Aug. 5, 1990, a t
E19 .
n9 John C h a n c e l l o r , P e r i l and Promise: A Commentary on America 111 (1990).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
7. There i s a l i n k a g e among these f a c t o r s . C a r e f u l l y conducted focus group
surveys f i n d t h a t v o t e r s b e l i e v e l o b b y i s t s have r e p l a c e d l e g i s l a t o r s as t h e
p r i m a r y p o l i t i c a l a c t o r s , and t h a t campaign c o n t r i b u t i o n s determine p o l i t i c a l
outcomes more t h a n v o t i n g . nlO When people today c l a i m t h a t " t h e i r v o t e doesn't
count," t h e y are making a statement o f p e r c e i v e d f a c t : v o t e r s don't choose
lobbyists.
- FootnotesnlO The K e t t e r i n g Foundation, C i t i z e n s and P o l i t i c s : A View Form Main S t r e e t
America 19-20 (1991) .
-End
Footnotes-
8. The I n s t i t u t e f o r Southern S t u d i e s ' "Money and P o l i t i c s " p r o j e c t has
found s p e c i f i c a l l y t h a t "the money chase d r i v e s v o t e r s from t h e p o l l s ,
discourages p o t e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e s from r u n n i n g , l i m i t s who has access t o e l e c t e d
o f f i c i a l s and government b u r e a u c r a t s , r e s t r i c t s what g e t s d i s c u s s e d , and
t r a n s f o r m s p o l i t i c s from a mass-based, v o l u n t a r y endeavor t o h i g h - s t a k e s ,
h i g h - t e c h dealmaking among p r o f e s s i o n a l i n s i d e r s . " n i l
- Footnotesn i l Bob H a l l , Who Owns t h e Government?, Southern Exposure, Summer 1992, a t
14, 15.
-End
Footnotes-
9. C o n t r a r y t o t h e a n t i c i p a t i o n i n Buckley v. Valeo, i t i s u n l i m i t e d
e x p e n d i t u r e s , n o t e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s , t h a t drown o r d i s t o r t campaign
communication. I n 1984, t o t a k e one example, f u l l y 95 p e r c e n t o f C a l i f o r n i a ' s
l e g i s l a t i v e races were f i n a n c i a l l y n o n - c o m p e t i t i v e ; n l 2 i n those c o n t e s t s , t h e
v o t e r s e f f e c t i v e l y c o u l d n o t hear what one o f t h e c a n d i d a t e s was s a y i n g .
- Footnotesn l 2 C a l i f o r n i a Comm'n on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , The New Gold Rush: F i n a n c i n g
C a l i f o r n i a ' s L e g i s l a t i v e Campaigns, Summary Report 3 (1985).
-End
Footnotes-
10. The h i g h c o s t o f p a i d campaign communications serves t o exclude
c o m p e t i t i o n from t h e b a l l o t box. F i g u r e s compiled from U.S. Senate races i n
1974-1984 show t h a t media e x p e n d i t u r e s p e r v o t e r i n c r e a s e d t h i r t e e n f o l d i n t h e
races t h a t were c o m p e t i t i v e d u r i n g t h i s p e r i o d , n l 3 from $ 0.67 p e r v o t e t o $
�m
LEXIS-NEXIS"
LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ 5 ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Reed Elsevier pic group
f/0 LEXIS-NEXIS"
'6^^
r n c m t > c r
o t
t h e
R c c d
tlscvicr pic group
�Page 97
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 136
7.74.
Candidates unable t o match t h a t pace s i m p l y l o s t t h e i r v o i c e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
n l 3 Hearings on Campaign Finance Reform, supra n o t e 2, a t 62.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
11. The n a t u r e and purpose o f p a i d media e x p r e s s i o n s i n p o l i t i c a l campaign
i s more t o i n g r a t i a t e t h a n t o i n f o r m . The
[*137]
practice i n well-financed
campaigns today i s , f i r s t , t o h i r e p o l l s t e r s t o measure what v o t e r s t h i n k t h e y
want; second, t o c u t t h e c a n d i d a t e ' s c l o t h ( o r c u t up t h e opponent's) t o conform
t o those measurements; and t h i r d , t o produce and p r e s e n t p a i d commercials a t
s a t u r a t i o n l e v e l , d i s p l a y i n g i n engaging terms t h e a r t i f i c i a l r e s u l t . n l 4
- Footnotesn l 4 Center For N a t ' l . Independence i n P o l i t i c s , The V o t e r ' s Self-Defense
Manual: P r o j e c t Vote Smart 4-5 (1992).
-End Footnotes12. The spending i n c r e a s e s e x p e r i e n c e d s i n c e Buckley v. Valeo have gone
l a r g e l y f o r these i n s t r u m e n t s o f m a n i p u l a t i o n , which t h e c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
a u t h o r i t y Paul Freund d e s c r i b e d as o n l y " m i n i m a l l y t h e k i n d o f speech o r
communication t h a t i s t o be p r o t e c t e d . " n l 5 They have l i t t l e i n common w i t h
James Madison's i d e a o f f r e e speech.
- Footnotesn l 5 Paul A. Freund, Commentary, i n F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n o f Campaign Finance:
Some C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Questions 74 ( A l b e r t J. Rosenthal ed., 1972).
-End Footnotes13. The onrush o f new media t e c h n o l o g y i s a c c e l e r a t i n g t h e t r e n d s t o
u n i n t e l l i g i b i l i t y , c o m p e t i t i v e p r e c l u s i o n , and m a n i p u l a t i o n . As t h e W a l l S t r e e t
Journal describes i t :
Lost i n t h e r u s h t o win, sometimes a t any c o s t , i s t h e q u a i n t n o t i o n o f a
t h o u g h t f u l c a n d i d a t e w i l l i n g t o t a k e time t o e x p l a i n , s l o w l y and w i s e l y , h i s o r
her p o s i t i o n s on major p o l i c y i s s u e s . What counts a r e t r a c k i n g p o l l s , focus
groups, d i a l groups, "wave f r o n t s " and d i g i t a l TV e d i t i n g machines, and a
c a n d i d a t e capable o f r a i s i n g t h e huge amounts o f cash needed t o pay f o r t h e
technology. n l 6
- Footnotesn l 6 James M. P e r r y , Young Guns: A Second G e n e r a t i o n o f P o l i t i c a l Handlers
Outduels Forebears: S e l f - s t y l e d 'Barbarians' Use New Mecha S k i l l s t o Run F a s t e r ,
Meaner Races: 'We're A l l Technocrats Now', W a l l S t . J., Jan. 10, 1994, a t A l .
�§ 1 LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
mcmbcr ot'thc Rccd Klsevier pk group
©
LEXIS-NEXIS*
~6<^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o'" the Reed Klsevier pk group
%t LEXIS-NEXIS*
" 6 ^
A
m
c
m
b
c
r
o f
the Reed Klsevier pk group
�Page 98
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *137
-End Footnotes-
14. I n f a c t u n l i m i t e d spending makes f o r incoherence i n t h e management o f
p o l i t i c a l campaigns: "Most campaigns today have no o v e r a l l p l a n ; t h e y proceed ad
hoc w i t h o u t budgets o r t i m e l i n e s because t h e i r e x p e n d i t u r e s a r e open ended." n l 7
- Footnotesn l 7 Thomas Mann, D i r e c t o r o f P o l i t i c a l S t u d i e s a t t h e Brookings I n s t i t u t i o n ,
Remarks a t an American U n i v e r s i t y Conference on Campaign Management (Dec. 1 1 ,
1992) ( t r a n s c r i p t on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - [*138]
-End Footnotes-
15. The heavy r e l i a n c e o f p o l i t i c i a n s on p a i d e x p r e s s i o n has a l s o b r o u g h t
about "the p o l i t i c a l e q u i v a l e n t o f a S i l e n t S p r i n g i n American p o l i t i c s , " w i t h
s h a r p l y reduced c i t i z e n p a r t i c i p a t i o n . n l 8
- Footnotesn l 8 Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t : Hearings on S.743, S.744, and S.1009 Before t h e
Subcomm. on Communications o f t h e Senate Comm. on Commerce, Science and
T r a n s p o r t a t i o n , 100th Cong., 1 s t Sess. 68 (1989) [ H e r e i n a f t e r Hearings on
Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t ] (statement o f C u r t i s Gans, D i r e c t o r , Committee f o r t h e
Study o f t h e American E l e c t o r a t e ) .
-End Footnotes-
16. Where t h e r e a r e no l i m i t s on spending, by a c h a l l e n g e r o r an incumbent,
b o t h w i l l i n e v i t a b l y f e e l t h e n e c e s s i t y t o r a i s e funds w i t h o u t l i m i t a t i o n . n l 9
The r e s u l t i s a f i n a n c i a l "arms r a c e , " i n which ( l i k e t h e n u c l e a r arms race o f
the Cold War p e r i o d ) n e i t h e r a d v e r s a r y w i l l accept l i m i t s u n l e s s b o t h a r e
o b l i g e d t o do so. n20
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
n l 9 Magleby & Nelson, supra n o t e 6, a t 197.
n20 See i d . a t 195-96; see a l s o Alexander, supra n o t e 1, a t 17.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
17. An incumbent who needs c o n s t a n t l y t o be r a i s i n g funds f o r t h e n e x t
campaign i s n o t f r e e t o address h i m s e l f t o t h e t a s k s f o r which he o r she was
e l e c t e d , namely, l e g i s l a t i n g and o v e r s e e i n g t h e E x e c u t i v e . As one s t a t e
l e g i s l a t o r p u t i t , " I ' v e been s i t t i n g here f o r two hours t h i s morning t r y i n g
h a r d t o l i s t e n t o t e s t i m o n y . But a l l I ended up d o i n g was making l i s t s o f people
who might p u t down $ 1,000 f o r a t a b l e a t my n e x t f u n d r a i s e r . " n21
�T
M
^^^k
^^^™
§
• LEXIS-NEXIS'
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of ihe Reed Elsevier pk group
^^^K M
^^^ T
LEXIS-NEXIS'
"6<^
A
member of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
'6<^
A
member of the Reed Elsevier pk- group
�Page 99
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *138
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
n21 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , supra note 12, a t 10.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
18. C h a l l e n g e r s t o o under t h e p r e s e n t system must spend up t o seventy
p e r c e n t o f t h e i r t i m e on f u n d - r a i s i n g e f f o r t s , s e v e r e l y l i m i t i n g t h e t i m e
a v a i l a b l e f o r i s s u e development and v o t e r engagement. n22
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
n22 Center f o r N a t ' l Independence i n P o l i t i c s , supra note 14, a t 4.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - -
19. The f e a r o f sudden, h e a v i l y f i n a n c e d " k i l l e r ads" a g a i n s t an incumbent's
l e g i s l a t i v e d e c i s i o n s has a well-documented c o n s t r i c t i n g e f f e c t on t h e honesty
of debate and t h e q u a l i t y o f d i s p o s i t i o n o f t h e p u b l i c ' s b u s i n e s s . n23
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
n23 Hearings on Campaign A d v e r t i s i n g A c t , supra note 18, a t 68.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
20. Faced w i t h such f a c t s , i n 1990, t h e Minnesota l e g i s l a t u r e passed t h e
Congressional Campaign Reform A c t . n24 The l e g i s l a t u r e found and d e c l a r e d t h a t
the need t o r a i s e c o n t r i b u [*139]
t i o n s a t c u r r e n t campaign spending l e v e l s
d i v e r t s c a n d i d a t e s from meeting v o t e r s and engaging t h e issues o f t h e day.
- Footnotes-
n24 Minn, Stat, sections 10A.40-10A.51 (1991). This statute was later
invalidated on federal preemption grounds in Weber v. Heaney, 793 F. Supp.
(D.
Minn.
1438
1992).
-End
Footnotes-
21. Summarizing more w i d e l y , t h e C a l i f o r n i a Commission on Campaign F i n a n c i n g
found and d e c l a r e d i n 1985 t h a t :
The c r i t i c a l campaign f i n a n c e problem f a c i n g t h e s t a t e i s c a n d i d a t e s '
p o t e n t i a l l y u n l i m i t e d demand f o r money. So l o n g as e l e c t i o n s can be won o r l o s t
by t h e e x p e n d i t u r e o f money, c a n d i d a t e s w i l l devote excessive a t t e n t i o n t o
f u n d r a i s i n g , open themselves t o i n f l u e n c e p e d d l i n g and n e g l e c t i m p o r t a n t s t a t e
i s s u e s . Newcomers w i l l be d e t e r r e d from seeking o f f i c e ; i n c r e a s e d p o l i t i c a l
gamesmanship w i l l t a k e p l a c e i n t h e S t a t e C a p i t o l ; and t h e responsiveness o f t h e
L e g i s l a t u r e w i l l s u f f e r . n25
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�\ IfXIS-NEXIS- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of rhe Reed Elsevier pic group
^0
LEXIS-NEXIS*
"6<^
A
member of rhe Reed Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS*
"6<.
A
member of thc Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 100
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 139
n25 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , supra note 12, a t 13.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - -
22. There has indeed been a d i s t o r t i o n o f democratic d i s c o u r s e , caused by a
c o m b i n a t i o n o f l i m i t l e s s campaign e x p e n d i t u r e and t h e p r i v a t e - i n t e r e s t f i n a n c i n g
of p u b l i c o f f i c e . n26 Among t h e enumerated e f f e c t s o f t h i s d i s t o r t i o n a r e t h e
following:
- Footnotesn26 Roland S. Hornet, J r . , R e v i t a l i z i n g American Democracy, Summary o f
F i n d i n g s f o r t h e Woodrow Wilson Center, A p r i l 8, 1992 (on f i l e w i t h t h e a u t h o r ) .
-End
Footnotes-
fa) O v e r a l l , a movement from democracy t o " p o l y a r c h y , " o r from r u l e o f t h e
many t o r u l e o f t h e s e l f s e l e c t e d few, accompanied by movements from law t o
f a v o r i t i s m , from p r e d i c t a b i l i t y t o a r b i t r a r i n e s s , from v o t e r responsiveness t o
funder responsiveness.
(b) The t r i v i a l i z a t i o n o f p o l i t i c s , v i a t e l e v i s i o n , t a b l o i d s , and o t h e r
h i g h - c o s t mass communications, t o t h e p o i n t o f g e n e r a t i n g i r r e s p o n s i b i l i t y i n
the conduct o f o f f i c e . Underattended n a t i o n a l i l l s a r e t h e consequence,
i n c l u d i n g such problems as drugs, d e f i c i t s , and d e f i c i e n t e d u c a t i o n .
(c) P o l i t i c a l and media a t t e n t i o n d i v e r t e d t o s u r f a c e s from depths, w i t h t h e
r e s u l t t h a t major concerns a r e n o t n o t i c e d when t h e y develop, such as t h e
savings and l o a n c r i s i s and t h e u n a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f " b l a c k " defense budgets.
[*140]
(d) A l o s s o f m e a n i n g f u l i n t e r - and i n t r a - p a r t y c o m p e t i t i o n and debate, as
incumbents o f b o t h p a r t i e s r e c e i v e f i n a n c i n g from t h e same i n t e r e s t e d sources.
(B) I n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f V o l u n t a r y L i m i t s
1. C o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s , approved by Bucklev v. Valeo, have been unable by
themselves t o check t h e d i s t o r t i o n o f democratic d i s c o u r s e . I t has been w i d e l y
i n e f f e c t t h r o u g h o u t t h e p e r i o d , w i t h o u t r e s t r a i n i n g what we have seen.
2. V o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s l i k e w i s e do n o t h o l d ; t h e y a r e u n d e r c u t by
�I LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Reed Elsevier pic group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS*
c
D
J
:
1
- ^ ^ ^ A* mcmbcr of rhe Rccd Elsevier pic group
'
—
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS*
1
u
0
J
,:|
:
1
- ^ ^ ^ * member '"- rhe — ' —
A
of - Reed Elsevier pk group
�Page 101
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *140
p e r s o n a l , p a r t y , and s o - c a l l e d
candidates.
"independent"
e x p e n d i t u r e s on b e h a l f o f
3. Even opponents o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n concede t h a t t h e l i m i t l e s s
c h a r a c t e r o f independent e x p e n d i t u r e , now i n e f f e c t , has made "meaningless"
v o l u n t a r y l i m i t s a s s o c i a t e d w i t h p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g . n27
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
the
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n27 ABA S p e c i a l Comm. on E l e c t i o n Reform, Campaign F i n a n c i n g a f t e r Bucklev v.
Valeo 2-4 (views o f H e r b e r t A l e x a n d e r ) .
-End
Footnotes-
4. I t i s i m p o s s i b l e as a p r a c t i c a l m a t t e r t o v e r i f y t h e p r o f e s s e d l y
"independent" c h a r a c t e r o f o u t s i d e e x p e n d i t u r e s . I n 1980, e a r l y i n t h e
p o s t - B u c k l e y era, an "independent" committee was o r g a n i z e d t o r a i s e $ 50 m i l l i o n
f o r c a n d i d a t e Ronald Reagan. A t t h e Republican Convention t h a t year, committee
chairman Senator Jesse Helms conceded t h a t i t was d i f f i c u l t t o keep up t h e
appearances o f detachment: " I ' v e had t o , s o r t o f , t a l k i n d i r e c t l y w i t h [Reagan
campaign chairman] Paul L a x a l t and hope t h a t he would pass a l o n g , uh, and I
t h i n k t h e messages have g o t t e n t h r o u g h a l l r i g h t . " The committee and t h e
campaign c o u l d keep a b r e a s t o f each o t h e r , as c o l l a b o r a t i v e businesses do,
t h r o u g h p u b l i c statements i n the p r e s s . And t h e committee p o r t r a y e d i t s e l f t o
c o n t r i b u t o r s as h a v i n g i n f l u e n c e w i t h t h e c a n d i d a t e . n28
- Footnotesn28 Anne V. Simonett, The Cons t i t u t i o n a l i t y o f R e g u l a t i n g Independent
E x p e n d i t u r e Committees i n P u b l i c l y Funded P r e s i d e n t i a l Campaigns, 18 Harv. J. on
L e g i s . 679, 685-87 (1981).
-End
Footnotes-
5. "Independent" e x p e n d i t u r e s are handy s u b s t i t u t e s f o r r e s t r i c t e d
c o n t r i b u t i o n s o r f o r renounced campaign spending. As an example, an A r i z o n a
i n i t i a t i v e i n 1986 c u r t a i l e d p o l i t i c a l
[*141]
a c t i o n committee (PAC)
c o n t r i b u t i o n s . I n t h e f o l l o w i n g e l e c t i o n i n 1988, PAC c o n t r i b u t i o n s dropped by
s i x t y - t w o p e r c e n t b u t were f u l l y made up by independent e x p e n d i t u r e s from t h e
same PAC's. n2 9
-Footnotesn29 A r i z o n a Common Cause, New Trends i n A r i z o n a ' s Money & P o l i t i c s : The 1988
L e g i s l a t i v e Races 4, 44 (1990) ( d i s c u s s i n g A r i z o n a ' s P r o p o s i t i o n 200).
-End
Footnotes-
6. A t t h e f e d e r a l l e v e l , "independent" e x p e n d i t u r e s burgeoned from a mere $
2 m i l l i o n i n 1976, when Bucklev was decided, t o over $ 21 m i l l i o n i n 1988. n30
They have become an a l t e r n a t i v e t o t h e a s s e r t e d l y l i m i t e d c o n t r i b u t i o n s and
e x p e n d i t u r e s o f t h e campaign p r o p e r .
�I LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
member oi'thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS
1
c
1
'-O^ ^ A* member of rhe Rccd Elsevier pk group
^
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS
A
1
c l
^ ^ J ^ A member of the — ' Elsevier pic group
» Rccd
-
�Page 102
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *141
-Footnotes- - - - - n30 S. Rep. No. 37, 102d Cong., 1 s t Sess. 20 (1991).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes- - - - -
7. Wealthy c a n d i d a t e s a r e f r e e t o i g n o r e v o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s , under
the regime o f Buckley. I n Los Angeles, f o r example, a c a r e f u l l y developed 1990
b a l l o t i n i t i a t i v e - - a d o p t i n g a mix o f spending l i m i t s and matching funds--was
s i d e s t e p p e d by t h e mayor e l e c t e d i n 1993. R i c h a r d Riordan's p e r s o n a l spending o f
over $ 6 m i l l i o n exceeded by a m u l t i p l e o f t h r e e t h e $ 2 m i l l i o n c e i l i n g
e s t a b l i s h e d by t h e v o t e r s . n31
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
n31 Common Cause, Campaign Finance Reform i n t h e S t a t e s 40-41 (1993).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
8. Such spending o u t o f a c a n d i d a t e ' s own resources may n o t be
s e l f - c o r r u p t i n g n32 b u t i t d i s t o r t s t h e e l e c t o r a l system. The e s s e n t i a l l y
l i m i t l e s s c h a r a c t e r o f such e x p e n d i t u r e o b l i g e s t h a t c a n d i d a t e ' s opponents t o
reach f o r ever l a r g e r amounts o f o u t s i d e s u p p o r t , w i t h t h e c o r r u p t i n g r e s u l t s we
have d i s c o v e r e d .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- - - -
n32 See BucJcley v. Valeo, 424 U.S.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1, 53
(1976).
-End Footnotes- - -
9. As an example, i n 1992, a w e a l t h y Texas o i l m a n named Michael H u f f i n g t o n
won h i s f i r s t p u b l i c campaign, f o r a seat i n t h e U.S. House o f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s
from C a l i f o r n i a , by spending $ 5 m i l l i o n o f h i s own money. I n 1994, he
announced f o r a Senate seat from t h e same s t a t e , d e c l a r i n g t h a t he was p r e p a r e d
t o spend up t o $ 15 m i l l i o n o f h i s p r i v a t e f o r t u n e f o r t h i s race. The Senate
incumbent, Dianne F e i n s t e i n , h e r s e l f f r e s h l y e l e c t e d , t o o k t h e t h r e a t s e r i o u s l y ;
her campaign manager s a i d i n e a r l y March o f 1994 t h a t "Dianne's o u t t h e r e
b e a t i n g t h e bushes 24 hours a day f o r money." I t was h a r d t o see how t h i s l e f t
much t i m e f o r s e r v i n g t h e needs o r i n t e r e s t s o f C a l i f o r n i a v o t e r s . n33
- Footnotesn33 B. Drummond Ayres, J r . , C a l i f o r n i a Race For Senate Seen As C o s t l y B a t t l e ,
N.Y. Times, Mar. 1 1 , 1994, a t A12.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
[*142]
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
10. The i n e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f v o l u n t a r y spending l i m i t s i s accented by t h e
emergence o f s o - c a l l e d " s o f t " money--supposed p a r t y - b u i l d i n g c o n t r i b u t i o n s t h a t
are i n f a c t d i v e r t e d t o c a n d i d a t e s . The e f f e c t o f t h i s copious l o o p h o l e , which
p e r m i t t e d c o n t r i b u t i o n s a t t h e n a t i o n a l l e v e l t o reach $ 43 m i l l i o n i n 1988, i s
�fp
LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
I LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ A . member of the Reed Elsevier pk group
# i LEXIS-NEXIS"
1
•^^ ^ A
1
t
J C l
member of thc 'Reed Elsevier 'pic group
—
•
�Page 103
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *142
t o undercut b o t h t h e small-money c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s approved i n Buckley v.
Valeo and t h e r a t i o n a l e f o r p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g , which was supposed t o have been
balanced by a l i m i t a t i o n on p r i v a t e c o n t r i b u t i o n s . n34
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n34 Report by the Center for Responsive Politics, in Wash. Post, July 26,
1992 at Al; Larry Makinson, Open Secrets: The Encyclopedia of Congressional
Money and Politics 16 (2d ed. 1992). Cf. Buckley
v. Valeo,
424 U.S. 1, 95,
107-08
(1976).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
11. C o r p o r a t i o n and l a b o r u n i o n c o n t r i b u t i o n s , l o n g o u t l a w e d by f e d e r a l
s t a t u t e , f l o w unchecked t h r o u g h t h e soft-money window. The t o p c o n t r i b u t o r s t o
t h e two major p a r t i e s , t h r o u g h t h i s r o u t e , a r e c o r p o r a t i o n s o r l a b o r unions w i t h
s t r o n g i n t e r e s t s i n r e g u l a t o r y p o l i c y . n35
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- - - - -
n35 Center f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s ,
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
supra note 34.
-End Footnotes- - - -
12. I n d i v i d u a l c o n t r i b u t o r s have emerged as t h e l a r g e s t sources o f s o f t
money. These donors, some w e a l t h y i n t h e i r own r i g h t b u t many more e x e c u t i v e s o f
c o r p o r a t i o n s o r a s s o c i a t i o n s , were by 1993 o u t s p e n d i n g p o l i t i c a l a c t i o n
committees a t t h e f e d e r a l l e v e l by n e a r l y 2 t o 1. Each p a r t y has s y s t e m a t i c a l l y
encouraged $ 100,000 d o n a t i o n s from these c o n t r i b u t o r s , d a n g l i n g ambassadorships
o r p o l i c y s h i f t s t o a t t r a c t t h e funds. There a r e now more $ 100,000 g i v e r s a t
the n a t i o n a l l e v e l t h a n t h e r e were a t t h e time o f Watergate. n36
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n36 I d .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes- -
-End Footnotes-
13. P u b l i c f i n a n c i n g , o r matching funds, cannot cure these problems, so l o n g
as t h e i r use and compliance w i t h spending l i m i t s remains v o l u n t a r y . For one
t h i n g , as experience has shown, a c a n d i d a t e can s i m p l y r e j e c t t h e p r o f f e r e d
bargain, without serious r i s k of r e j e c t i o n a t the p o l l s ; other factors usually
govern t h e v o t e r s ' s e l e c t i o n . n37
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-Footnotes- -
n3 7 See Common Cause, supra note 3 1 .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes-
14. V o t e r s by and l a r g e have l o s t c o n f i d e n c e i n t h e m a t c h i n g - f u n d system.
Tax c h e c k - o f f s have d e c l i n e d a t b o t h t h e f e d e r a l and s t a t e l e v e l s . I n Michigan,
the d e c l i n e i s from 28.3 p e r [*143]
cent i n 1977 t o 11.1 p e r c e n t i n 1991.
n38 I n Wisconsin, t a x - f i l e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n d e c l i n e d from a h i g h o f n e a r l y t w e n t y
p e r c e n t i n 1979 t o 11.6 p e r c e n t i n 1991. n39
�I LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
#i
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
1
^ ^ ^ A* mcmbcr of thc D „ J L-I
f
,.
Rccd Elsevier pk- group
#i
LEXIS-NEXIS*
1
f L - Reed T , . . . . : -Z D^ A member of .thc » — J Elsevier pk group
^J .
�Page 104
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *143
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n38 Michigan Bureau o f E l e c t i o n s , S t a t e Campaign Fund Program (1993).
n39 Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e C o u n c i l , S t a f f Reports t o t h e S p e c i a l Committee on
Campaign F i n a n c i n g (1993).
-End
Footnotes-
15. The funds t h a t a r e g a t h e r e d t e n d t o be adequate f o r t h e needs o f
well-known incumbents b u t n o t o f unknown c h a l l e n g e r s . I n Wisconsin, t h e y a r e
used c h i e f l y by c a n d i d a t e s who a r e unopposed o r o t h e r w i s e do n o t need i t . I n
c o n t e s t e d races, b o t h c a n d i d a t e s f o r e g o p u b l i c funds and w i t h them a l l spending
l i m i t s . n40
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n4 0 I d .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
(C) B e n e f i t s o f Mandatory L i m i t s
1. C o n t r a r y a g a i n t o t h e e x p e c t a t i o n s v o i c e d i n Buckley v. Valeo, t h a t
" v i r t u a l l y a l l m e a n i n g f u l p o l i t i c a l communications i n t h e modern s e t t i n g i n v o l v e
the e x p e n d i t u r e o f money," n41 t h e most i n s t r u c t i v e and most p e r s u a s i v e channels
of campaign d i s c o u r s e have t u r n e d o u t i n r e c e n t years t o be f r e e o r
i n e x p e n s i v e - - n o t a t a l l dominated by t h e power o f money.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - n41 Bucklev,
424 U.S.
at
-Footnotes- -
11.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
2. I n t h e 1992 P r e s i d e n t i a l campaign, media a d v i s e r s t o b o t h major p a r t i e s
agreed t h a t i t was t h e f r e e p o l i t i c a l media t h a t dominated: i n t e r v i e w s , debates,
and c a l l - i n programs. By mid-June o f t h a t year, c a n d i d a t e C l i n t o n had so many
u n p a i d t a l k show o p p o r t u n i t i e s t h a t he .canceled a scheduled h a l f - h o u r o f p a i d
t e l e v i s i o n t i m e . Toni C l a r k e , t h e Bush campaign's spokesman, e x p l a i n e d t h a t , on
i n t e r v i e w shows, t h e c a n d i d a t e g e t s t o develop h i s own ideas and emphases a t h i s
own pace, and t o t a l k t o v o t e r s o r h o s t s r a t h e r t h a n t o media t r i b u n e s . n42
- Footnotesn42 R i c h a r d Harwood, The Growing I r r e l e v a n c e o f J o u r n a l i s t s , Wash. Post, Oct.
23, 1992, a t A21; E l i z a b e t h K o l b e r t , W h i s t l e Stops a l a 1992: A r s e n i o , L a r r y and
P h i l , N.Y. Times, June 5, 1992, a t A18.
-End
Footnotes-
3. Tim Russert, t h e p r e s i d i n g t r i b u n e on NBC's Meet t h e Press, r e f l e c t e d
t h a t " t h e c a n d i d a t e s have decided t h a t t h e y p r e f e r t o communicate i n an
�I LEXIS-NEXIS*
I
f .U. D
I c i ,
- ^ ^^^ Ai member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
# 4 LEXIS-NEXIS"
^ ^ ^ ^
I
-.r - L _
I.
• ^ ^ A 1 member of the t> I HI
Reed Elsevier pic group
# i LEXIS-NEXIS*
I
U .
I
- ^ ^ A 1 mcmbcr of .the D
Rccd C\
Elsevier pk group
�Page 105
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *143
u n f i l t e r e d way." n43
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- -
n43 I d .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
4. A l s o s i g n i f i c a n t was t h e f u l l coverage o f speeches and events made
a v a i l a b l e by c a b l e and p u b l i c b r o a d c a s t i n g . One
[*144]
might f i n d l i t t l e b u t
sound b i t e s on network news, b u t t h e MacNeil-Lehrer News Hour showed t h e
c a n d i d a t e ' s e n t i r e s t a n d a r d stump speech. F u l l i n t e r v i e w s and speeches were a l s o
t e l e v i s e d r e g u l a r l y over C-SPAN and CNN. By midsummer o f 1992, these appearances
had become such a s t a p l e p a r t o f t h e p o l i t i c a l d i e t t h a t t h e New York Times t o o k
t o p u b l i s h i n g a d a i l y schedule. On F r i d a y , J u l y 24, f o r example, i t l i s t e d
P r e s i d e n t Bush a t 10 a.m. on t h e C h r i s t i a n B r o a d c a s t i n g Network (an i n t e r v i e w )
and a g a i n a t 5:30 p.m. on C-SPAN (a speech). The C l i n t o n - G o r e t i c k e t was
r e p r e s e n t e d t h a t day on C-SPAN a t 5 p.m. and 5:15 p.m. (speeches) and a g a i n a t
9:30 p.m. and 10:00 p.m. ( i n t e r v i e w s ) . n44
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
n44 See Candidates on T e l e v i s i o n , N.Y. Times, J u l y 24, 1992, a t A13 .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - -
5. Something c a l l e d " P r o j e c t Vote Smart," i n Oregon, combining an "800"
number w i t h computer data banks, a l s o debuted i n 1992. Funded by memberships and
n o n - p r o f i t g r a n t s , i t o f f e r e d data on v o t i n g r e c o r d s , performance e v a l u a t i o n s ,
and c a n d i d a t e b i o g r a p h i e s - - a l l w i t h o u t c o s t t o campaigns o r t o v o t e r s . n45
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - -
n45 Center f o r N a t ' l Independence i n P o l i t i c s , supra note 14.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - -
6. The f i r s t n a t i o n a l debate between t h e l e a d i n g p r e s i d e n t i a l c a n d i d a t e s
drew 75 p e r c e n t o f t h e t e l e v i s i o n audience, even though i t began a t 4 p.m.,
d u r i n g work hours, on t h e West Coast. Each debate drew p r o g r e s s i v e l y l a r g e r
audiences, r e a c h i n g 91 p e r c e n t f o r t h e t h i r d and f i n a l debate. n46 None o f t h e
debates c o s t t h e c a n d i d a t e s a n y t h i n g b u t p r e p a r a t i o n t i m e .
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n46 See F i n a l Debate Tops R a t i n g s , N.Y. Times, October 2 1 , 1992 a t A19.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
7. The expanded use o f f r e e and l o w - c o s t media, encouraged by t h e a d o p t i o n
of reasonable spending l i m i t s , would t e n d t o enhance v o t e r c o n t a c t and
a c c o u n t a b i l i t y . These changes would s t i m u l a t e a movement away from s t u d i o
appearances and toward p u b l i c engagement--which i s b o t h l e s s expensive and more
p a r t i c i p a t o r y , hence more p r o d u c t i v e o f F i r s t Amendment speech and a s s o c i a t i o n .
�0
LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ ^ ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS*
-^^A
member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
^
LEXIS-NEXIS*
- ^ J ^ A member of ihe Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 106
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *144
n47
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n47 Developments i n t h e Law: E l e c t i o n s , 88 Harv. L . Rev.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
llll,
1238
(1975).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
8. Seasoned campaign c o n s u l t a n t s , a n t i c i p a t i n g e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t a t i o n , have
s a i d f o r t h e r e c o r d t h a t these s h o u l d s t i m u l a t e
[*145]
c r e a t i v e uses o f t h e
f r e e media. L i m i t s w i l l " ' d i m i n i s h t h e importance o f p a i d a d v e r t i s i n g ' and
f o s t e r ' i n n o v a t i v e ways o f communicating w i t h v o t e r s . ' " n48
- Footnotesn48 Mark S t e n c e l , Changing t h e Ways That P o l i t i c a l C o n s u l t a n t s Work, Wash.
Post, Feb. 8, 1993, a t F15 ( q u o t i n g Frank Greer, a Democratic media s t r a t e g i s t
and c o n s u l t a n t ) .
-End Footnotes9. The r e d u c t i o n o f campaign spending t o reasonable l e v e l s w i l l a l s o
encourage t h e emergence o f new, d i v e r s e , and q u i e t e r v o i c e s . As former S o l i c i t o r
General A r c h i b a l d Cox has w r i t t e n : "The amount o f money spent i n modern
campaigns . . . bears almost no r e l a t i o n t o t h e number o f i s s u e s d i s c u s s e d o r
the depth o f t h e i r e x p l o r a t i o n . . . . The money buys c h i e f l y r e p e t i t i o n . " n49
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n49 Archibald Cox, Constitutional Issues in the Regulation of the Financing
of Election Campaigns,
Valeo,
424 U.S.
1, 19
31 Clev.
(1976).
St.
L.
Rev.
395,
416.
Compare
Bucklev
v.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -End Footnotes- - - - - - - - - - - - - - 10. The l a t e g r e a t dean o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l law s c h o l a r s , Paul Freund,
l i k e w i s e a s s e r t e d t h a t "we a r e d e a l i n g here n o t so much w i t h t h e r i g h t o f
p e r s o n a l e x p r e s s i o n o r even a s s o c i a t i o n , b u t w i t h d o l l a r s and d e c i b e l s . " n50
B r i n g i n g down t h e n o i s e l e v e l w i l l be good f o r democratic d i s c o u r s e .
- Footnotesn50 Paul A. Freund, Commentary, i n F e d e r a l R e g u l a t i o n o f Campaign Finance:
Some C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Questions 71 ( A l b e r t J. Rosenthal ed., 1972).
-End Footnotes11. A modicum o f o r d e r i s i n any event necessary t o t h e e x e r c i s e o f
c o n s t i t u t i o n a l l i b e r t i e s . The town meeting, f o r example, r e q u i r e s a moderator t o
a p p l y r u l e s o f r e c o g n i t i o n and governance t o t h e p r o c e e d i n g s . I f everyone
grabbed f o r t h e microphone, t h e r e c o u l d be no meeting and no d i s c o u r s e . n51
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n51 Alexander M e i k l e j o h n , P o l i t i c a l Freedom: The C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Powers o f t h e
�m
LEXIS-NEXIS"
LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
- ^ J ^ A member of the Reed Elsevier pic group
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
9
LEXIS-NEXIS"
-^^A
mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pk group
�Page 107
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *145
People 24-28 (1960). See also Harry Kalvan, Jr., The Concept of the Public
Forum, 1965 Sup. Ct. Rev. 1. "In any theory, speech has always been dependent on
some commitment to order and etiquette." Id. at 23.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
12. I n t h i s v e r y p r a c t i c a l sense, mandatory spending l i m i t s w i l l serve t o
enhance speech--as communication, r a t h e r t h a n noise--more t h a n t h e y d e t r a c t from
i t . They a r e l i k e t h e exchange r e g u l a t i o n s t h a t a l l o w f r e e s e c u r i t i e s markets t o
f u n c t i o n . n52
-Footnotesn52 Compare Harold Leventhal, Courts and Political Thickets, 77 Colum. L.
i?ev. 345 (1977) with Marlene Nicholson, Political Campaign Expenditure
Limitations and the Unconstitutional Condition Doctrine, 10 Hastings
Const.
L.Q.
601,
631-32
(1983).
-End
Footnotes-
[*146]
(D) Reasonableness o f Spending L i m i t s
1. To summarize, t h e r e i s good reason t o s u p p o r t t h e c o n c l u s i o n o f t h e
C a l i f o r n i a Commission on Campaign Financing--reached a f t e r e i g h t years o f
s e a r c h i n g i n q u i r y - - t h a t t h e p r e s e n t system o f u n l i m i t e d spending i s
" d e s t a b i l i z i n g and i n h e r e n t l y c o r r u p t i v e o f t h e democratic process." The
Commission b e l i e v e s i t " s t r o n g l y d e s i r a b l e t o p r e s e n t t h e [U.S. Supreme] Court
w i t h c a r e f u l l y researched data and arguments so t h a t i t can c o n s i d e r u p h o l d i n g
r e s p o n s i b l e l i m i t a t i o n s . " n53
- Footnotesn53 C a l i f o r n i a Comm. on Campaign F i n a n c i n g , Democracy By I n i t i a t i v e 28
(1992) .
-End
Footnotes-
2. Spending l i m i t s , t o be e f f e c t i v e , must be mandatory. To be reasonable,
they must a l s o be s e l e c t e d w i t h care. Too low a spending l i m i t c o u l d f a i l t o l e t
c h a l l e n g e r s achieve t h e needed t h r e s h o l d o f v i s i b i l i t y . n54 Too h i g h a l e v e l , on
the o t h e r hand, would s i m p l y c o n t i n u e t h e p r e s e n t c l u t t e r .
- Footnotesn54 See H e r b e r t Alexander, F i n a n c i n g P o l i t i c s : Money, E l e c t i o n s and P o l i t i c a l
Reform 40 (1976).
-End
Footnotes-
3. Spending l i m i t s do n o t , as some have m a i n t a i n e d , i n h e r e n t l y d i s c r i m i n a t e
a g a i n s t c h a l l e n g e r s . "Reasonable l i m i t s , " i n s t e a d , " w i l l a i d most c h a l l e n g e r s by
f o r c i n g economy on incumbents. C h a l l e n g e r s themselves, who do n o t o r d i n a r i l y
�f p LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pk group
LEXIS-NEXIS
-^^A
mcmbcr of thc Reed Elsevier pk group
%k LEXIS-NEXIS
. r thc B . . J C I . . . . : . . _..
•^ ^ ^ A* mcmbcr of . u . Reed Elsevier pk group
^
�Page 108
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *146
spend beyond most c e i l i n g s s e r i o u s l y proposed, w i l l be l a r g e l y u n a f f e c t e d . " n55
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n55 Jonathan Krasno & Donald P. Green, Stopping t h e Buck Here: The Case f o r
Campaign Spending L i m i t s , Brookings Rev., S p r i n g 1993, a t 17, 19.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
4. To be reasonable, t h e e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s s h o u l d a p p l y no more w i d e l y than
i s necessary. They should l i m i t themselves t o e x p e n d i t u r e s by o r on b e h a l f o f a
candidacy f o r e l e c t i v e o f f i c e . They need n o t and s h o u l d n o t r e s t r a i n
independent, i s s u e - o r i e n t e d speech, o r communications w i t h i n an o r g a n i z a t i o n , o r
e x p r e s s i o n s o f e i t h e r f a c t o r o p i n i o n by t h e media. n56
-Footnotesn56 See Rod S. Fiori, Note, A Comparative Analysis of English and American
Campaign
Finance
Laws,
11 Hastings
Int'l
-End
& Comp.
L.
Rev.
289,
293
& n.49
(1988).
Footnotes-
5. The p u b l i c ' s i n t e r e s t i n a c c o u n t a b i l i t y o f i t s p o l i t i c a l i n s t i t u t i o n s i s
today b e i n g unreasonably t h w a r t e d by t h e u n i n t e n d e d e f f e c t s o f Bucklev v.
Valeo. I n 1992, a mood o f v o t e r r e b e l l i o n was w i d e l y h e r a l d e d as p r e s a g i n g a
rejection of i n [*147]
cumbent o f f i c e - h o l d e r s . n57 I n f a c t , incumbents
r a i s e d and spent whatever was necessary t o h o l d on t o o f f i c e . I n t h e t i g h t e s t
races f o r t h e U.S. House o f R e p r e s e n t a t i v e s , where t h e margin o f v i c t o r y was
l e s s t h a n 5 p e r c e n t , incumbents spent an average o f $ 788,000--an enormous
i n c r e a s e over t h e average o f $ 412,000 f o r a l l House races two years b e f o r e . n5f
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n57 The N a t i o n : A Surge o f Incumbents Opts Out, N.Y. Times, May 17, 1992,
s e c t i o n 4 (The Week i n Review), a t 5.
n58 Michael Wines, Candidates f o r Congress Spent Record $ 678 M i l l i o n , a 52%
Jump, N.Y. Times, March 5, 1993, a t A12.
-End
Footnotes-
6. Focus group surveys show t h a t m a j o r i t i e s r e a c h i n g up t o 90 p e r c e n t f a v o r
mandatory spending l i m i t s as t h e i r campaign f i n a n c e remedy o f c h o i c e . This
compares w i t h 68 p e r c e n t support f o r l e g i s l a t i v e term l i m i t s . E f f e c t i v e
e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s , r e s t o r i n g p o p u l a r c o n t r o l over t h e a c t u a l l e n g t h o f a
p o l i t i c i a n ' s t e n u r e i n o f f i c e , would undercut t h e p e r c e i v e d n e c e s s i t y f o r
a r b i t r a r y term l i m i t s . n59
- Footnotesn59 Greenberg-Lake A s s o c i a t e s , Maine and Ohio p o l l s (1993); Center f o r Law i n
t h e P u b l i c I n t e r e s t , C a l i f o r n i a p o l l (1992) ; L o u i s v i l l e C o u r i e r - J o u r n a l ,
Kentucky p o l l (1991). N a t i o n a l F e d e r a t i o n o f Independent Business, n a t i o n w i d e
p o l l (1989) (copies on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
�f|
LEXIS-NEXIS'
' ^ J ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd F.lscvier pic group
i l
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
- ^ J ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd F.lscvier pic group
Q
LEXIS-NEXIS'
-^5^A
mcmbcr of the Reed Elsevier pic group
�Page 109
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 147
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - III.
-End F o o t n o t e s -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LAW AND PRACTICE I N OTHER INDUSTRIAL DEMOCRACIES
(A) Mandatory Spending L i m i t s
1. Among America's s i x a l l i e s i n t h e s o - c a l l e d Group o f 7 i n d u s t r i a l
democracies, f u l l y h a l f - - B r i t a i n , Canada, and France--impose mandatory spending
l i m i t s on p o l i t i c a l campaigns.
2. Others who have done so i n c l u d e Belgium, I s r a e l , New Zealand, and Spain.
n6 0
-Footnotesn60 Center f o r Responsive P o l i t i c s , P r e l i m i n a r y Study o f F o r e i g n E l e c t i o n
Systems (1992) (copy on f i l e w i t h a u t h o r ) .
-End Footnotes3. I n
ceilings;
days o f a
curtailed.
Canadian g e n e r a l e l e c t i o n s , f o r example, t h e r e a r e f i x e d spending
t h e purchase o f a d v e r t i s e m e n t s i s l i m i t e d t o t h e l a s t t w e n t y - e i g h t
campaign; and t h e purchase o f t i m e on t h e e l e c t r o n i c media i s s t r i c t l y
n61
-Footnotes-
n61 Khayyam Z. P a l t i e l , Canadian E l e c t i o n Expense L e g i s l a t i o n , 1963-85, i n
H e r b e r t Alexander, Comparative P o l i t i c a l Finance i n t h e 1980s 51, 66-68 (1989).
-End Footnotes[*148]
4. P a r l i a m e n t a r y e l e c t i o n s i n t h e U n i t e d Kingdom are c u r r e n t l y l i m i t e d t o
t h r e e weeks and are s u b j e c t t o r i g o r o u s spending l i m i t s : each c a n d i d a t e has a
$ 15,000 spending c e i l i n g ; and t e l e v i s i o n t i m e , a l l o t t e d t h r o u g h t h e p o l i t i c a l
p a r t i e s , cannot be purchased by c a n d i d a t e s . U n a u t h o r i z e d e l e c t i o n e x p e n d i t u r e s
by t h i r d p a r t i e s , i n t e n d e d t o promote t h e e l e c t i o n o f an i d e n t i f i a b l e c a n d i d a t e ,
are " c o r r u p t a c t s " s u b j e c t t o c r i m i n a l punishment. I t may sound t i g h t l y
c o n s t r a i n e d , b u t t h e average v o t e r t u r n o u t i n these e l e c t i o n s i s s e v e n t y - f i v e
p e r c e n t , h a l f a g a i n as h i g h as i n American p r e s i d e n t i a l c o n t e s t s . n62
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes- - - -
n62 See F i o r i , supra n o t e 56, a t 291-93, 315-17.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-End Footnotes- - -
5. Of course t h e s o c i e t i e s and c u l t u r e s are d i f f e r e n t . There i s s t r o n g p a r t y
d i s c i p l i n e i n England, and a c o m p a r a t i v e l y homogeneous e l e c t o r a t e . Other
c o u n t r i e s t y p i c a l l y have no w r i t t e n B i l l o f R i g h t s , and no independent j u d i c i a l
r e v i e w o f campaign laws f o r c o n s t i t u t i o n a l i t y . But t h e American p r a c t i c e on
these m a t t e r s , i n c l u d i n g Buckley v. Valeo, has become t h e b a s i s f o r an argument
�jfy LEXIS-NEXIS
^ ^ ^ ^
_
i
_ r .1
D
i
i .
- ^ ^ A . mcmbcr of rhe Rccd c i
Elsevier pk group
®
^ " ^ ^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
. /
i
- r i . - D - _ J I-I
i.
- ^ 5L^J i mcmbcr of - thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
A
©
LEXIS-NEXIS"
-£-^)
i
.1
D
i ci
:
i
^ J ^ AL member of the Reed Elsevier pk. group
�Page 110
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, *148
elsewhere a g a i n s t a d o p t i n g a B i l l o f R i g h t s . "A p a r t i c u l a r l y d i s t u r b i n g
tendency," w r i t e s one commentator, "has been t h e u n w i l l i n g n e s s on t h e p a r t o f
the American c o u r t s t o s u s t a i n l e g i s l a t i o n i n t h e face o f c o n s t i t u t i o n a l
challenge, thereby f a c i l i t a t i n g the continued domination of the p o l i t i c a l
process by moneyed i n t e r e s t s . " n63
- Footnotesn6 3 K.D. Ewing, The Legal Regulation of Campaign Financing in American
Federal Elections, 47 Cambridge L.J.
370, 402
(1988).
-End Footnotes6. The p o i n t o f these comparative r e c i t a t i o n s i s n o t o f course t h a t t h e
U n i t e d S t a t e s must f e e l compelled t o move i n t h e d i r e c t i o n o f any p a r t i c u l a r
f o r e i g n e x p e n d i t u r e - l i m i t model; m e r e l y t h a t i t can do so w i t h o u t d e p a r t i n g from
c i v i l i z e d norms.
(B) Impetus Toward Reform
1. A n t i c i p a t i n g domestic and i n t e r n a t i o n a l c r i t i c i s m o f e l e c t o r a l dominance
by i t s g o v e r n i n g p a r t y , Mexico, i n 1993, adopted r e f o r m l e g i s l a t i o n t o govern
the 1994 p r e s i d e n t i a l e l e c t i o n s i n t h a t c o u n t r y . Under t h e new law, t h e F e d e r a l
E l e c t o r a l I n s t i t u t e was empowered t o f i x mandatory l i m i t s on campaign spending.
I n December o f 1993, t h e l i m i t was s e t a t $ 213 m i l l i o n f o r each c a n d i d a t e ,
which drew c r i t i c i s m because sums o f t h i s magnitude c o u l d o n l y come from
i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s behold[*149]
en o r hoping t o become beholden t o t h e
g o v e r n i n g p a r t y . The f o l l o w i n g month, a f t e r a r e b e l u p r i s i n g i n t h e s o u t h e r n
s t a t e o f Chiapas, t h e government s w i t c h e d d i r e c t i o n and agreed t o an e i g h t y
p e r c e n t r e d u c t i o n i n t h i s spending l e v e l , down t o $ 44 m i l l i o n . n64
- Footnotesn64 Damian Fraser, S a l i n a s Brushes Up Mexico's P o l l s Image, F i n . Times
(London), Sept. 22, 1993, a t 4; Tim Golden, Mexican P a r t i e s Agree t o Reforms:
Spurred by Peasant U p r i s i n g , Pact Vows E l e c t i o n L i m i t s , N.Y. Times, Jan. 28,
1994, a t A l , A4.
-End Footnotes2. I n 1993, t h e governments o f two f u r t h e r Group o f 7 member s t a t e s - - I t a l y
and Japan--were f o r c e d o u t o f o f f i c e f o r f a i l u r e t o c o r r e c t l o n g - s t a n d i n g
campaign f i n a n c e abuses. Reform governments were e l e c t e d on pledges, among o t h e r
t h i n g s , t o remedy these d e f e c t s . The I t a l i a n r e f o r m agenda as o f t h e end o f 1995
was n o t c l e a r . I n Japan, t h e r e f o r m c o a l i t i o n headed by Prime M i n i s t e r M o r i h i r o
Hosakawa managed t o push t h r o u g h a compromise b i l l b e f o r e Hosakawa h i m s e l f was
o b l i g e d t o r e s i g n . I t s main f e a t u r e s c a l l e d f o r c o n t r i b u t i o n l i m i t s , f i n a n c i a l
d i s c l o s u r e , and e l e c t o r a l r e d i s t r i c t i n g - - a l l w i d e l y regarded t o be v a l u a b l e
measures. The a c t d i d n o t i n c l u d e mandatory spending l i m i t s . A r c h i t e c t s o f t h e
r e f o r m i n d i c a t e d , however, t h a t t h e i r p l a n was t o pass something t h e n and t o
s t r e n g t h e n i t l a t e r . n6 5
-Footnotes-
�T
M
§I
LEXIS-NEXIS*
J
I
i* . U _
I
l..
- *^_ ^ ^ AA member ot'thc II
Rccd H I
Elsevier pk group
^^^ "
^ ^ V"
#i
M
-
LEXIS-NEXIS
_ £ - J
I
- I ' . L .
i .
_
- ^ ^ AA member ot'thc n - - 1 r-i
Rccd Elsevier pk group
^^^^^SJ
#i
^ " ^ ^ ^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
. . .
i
r
j
•#^ JS ^ Ai member of .the Reed 11 .
Elsevier pk- group
�Page 111
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 149
n65 James S t e r n g o l d , Japan's Leader Broadens H i s B a t t l e t o Win Reform, N.Y.
Times, Jan. 28, 1994, a t A10.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (IV)
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
STATE LAW AND PRACTICE
(A) Before Buckley v. Valeo
1. The s t a t e s have power t o r e g u l a t e t h e i r own e l e c t i o n s f o r s t a t e o f f i c e ,
s u b j e c t t o t h e a p p l i c a b l e r e s t r a i n t s o f t h e Federal B i l l o f R i g h t s . n66
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
n66 Oregon v. Mitchell,
Comm., 926 F.2d 573, 575
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
400 U.S. 112, 125 (1970);
Pestrak
v. Ohio
(6th Cir.), cert, dismissed, 502 U.S. 1022
-End
Elections
(1991).
Footnotes-
2. D u r i n g t h e Watergate p e r i o d (1973-1974), and b e f o r e t h e d e c i s i o n i n
Buckley, f u l l y f o u r - f i f t h s o f t h e s t a t e l e g i s l a t u r e s enacted campaign f i n a n c e
r e f o r m s - - i n c l u d i n g t h i r t y - f o u r w i t h mandatory l i m i t s on e x p e n d i t u r e s . n67
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n67 Developments i n t h e Law: E l e c t i o n s , supra note 47, a t 1254 & n.122.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
3. L i t t l e t i m e was a l l o w e d f o r experience w i t h them b e f o r e t h e Buckley
d e c i s i o n i n 1976.
[*150]
(B) Since Buckley v. Valeo
1. The N a t i o n a l M u n i c i p a l League's Model S t a t e Campaign Finance Law,
p u b l i s h e d i n 1979, accepted Buckley's p r o h i b i t i o n o f e x p e n d i t u r e l i m i t s , and
c o n t e n t e d i t s e l f - - a s d i d t h e s u r v i v i n g f e d e r a l l a w - - w i t h a regime o f f i n a n c i a l
d i s c l o s u r e . n68
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n68 N a t i o n a l M u n i c i p a l League, Model S t a t e Campaign Finance Law 38 (1979).
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2. By 1984, o n l y f i v e s t a t e s had r e i n t r o d u c e d e x p e n d i t u r e c e i l i n g s , each
v o l u n t a r y and t i e d t o p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g . n6 9
- Footnotesn69 California Comm. on Campaign Financing, supra note 12, at 12. For a
summary of current state laws, see Thomas P. Dvorak, Comment, State Campaign
Finance Law: An Overview and a Call For Reform, 55 Mo. L. Rev. 937,
962-70
(1990) .
�> LEXIS-NEXIS'
- l — J
I
_f
I
I
- ^ J ^ AA mcmbcr of .1 D
thc Rccd C l
Elsevier pic. group
LEXIS-NEXIS'
.£-^J
I
_ - L
D
171
1
^ ^ ^ AA mcmbcr ofi the- RccdI Elsevier pic . group
#i
^ • ^ ^
LEXIS-NEXIS'
Z I
.1.
D
IT I
:
I
•- ^ ^ JA A member of« the. Reed I Elsevier pk . group
�Page 112
21 Okla. City U.L. Rev. 97, * 150
-End Footnotes3. The s t a t e s have been r e s t i v e w i t h t h e c o n s t r a i n t s on spending l i m i t s ,
e s p e c i a l l y as p u b l i c s u p p o r t f o r p u b l i c f i n a n c i n g has d w i n d l e d . n70 A s t a t u t o r y
r e t u r n t o mandatory spending l i m i t s was approved by t h e Wisconsin L e g i s l a t i v e
C o u n c i l i n 1993 w i t h t h e s u p p o r t o f t h a t s t a t e ' s A t t o r n e y General. n71
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-Footnotes-
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
n70 See Common Cause, Campaign Finance Reform i n t h e S t a t e s 14-16 (1985).
n71 E l e c t i o n Reform Hearings Before t h e Wisconsin Assembly Comm. on
E l e c t i o n s , C o n s t i t u t i o n a l Law, and C o r r e c t i o n s 180 (1994) ( t e s t i m o n y o f Roland
Hornet).
-End Footnotes4. B a l l o t i n i t i a t i v e s t o t h e same e f f e c t a r e b e i n g developed i n o t h e r
s t a t e s , i n c l u d i n g C a l i f o r n i a and Oregon. n72
- Footnotesn72 Correspondence
author).
w i t h Oregon and C a l i f o r n i a r e f o r m l e a d e r s (on f i l e
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
-End Footnotes-
with
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
�LEXIS- NEXIS"
mbcr ot'thc Rccd Elst
r pic group
LEXIS-NEXIS"
• ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of the Rccd Elsevier pic group
^^^^^^
LEXIS-NEXIS"
- ^ ^ ^ A mcmbcr of thc Rccd Elsevier pic group
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Michael Waldman
Description
An account of the resource
<p>Michael Waldman was Assistant to the President and Director of Speechwriting from 1995-1999. His responsibilities were writing and editing nearly 2,000 speeches, which included four State of the Union speeches and two Inaugural Addresses. From 1993 -1995 he served as Special Assistant to the President for Policy Coordination.</p>
<p>The collection generally consists of copies of speeches and speech drafts, talking points, memoranda, background material, correspondence, reports, handwritten notes, articles, clippings, and presidential schedules. A large volume of this collection was for the State of the Union speeches. Many of the speech drafts are heavily annotated with additions or deletions. There are a lot of articles and clippings in this collection.</p>
<p>Due to the size of this collection it has been divided into two segments. Use links below for access to the individual segments:<br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+1">Segment One</a><br /><a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/browse?advanced%5B0%5D%5Belement_id%5D=43&advanced%5B0%5D%5Btype%5D=is+exactly&advanced%5B0%5D%5Bterms%5D=2006-0469-F+Segment+2">Segment Two</a></p>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Michael Waldman
Office of Speechwriting
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1993-1999
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
Segment One contains 1071 folders in 72 boxes.
Segment Two contains 868 folders in 66 boxes.
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
Clinton Presidential Records: White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
CFR [Campaign Finance Reform] - FEC [Federal Election Commission] [3]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Office of Speechwriting
Michael Waldman
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
Box 55
<a href="http://clinton.presidentiallibraries.us/items/show/36404"> Collection Finding Aid</a>
<a href="https://catalog.archives.gov/id/7763296">National Archives Catalog Description</a>
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
2006-0469-F Segment 2
Provenance
A statement of any changes in ownership and custody of the resource since its creation that are significant for its authenticity, integrity, and interpretation. The statement may include a description of any changes successive custodians made to the resource.
White House Staff and Office Files
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
William J. Clinton Presidential Library & Museum
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Adobe Acrobat Document
Medium
The material or physical carrier of the resource.
Preservation-Reproduction-Reference
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
6/3/2015
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
7763296
42-t-7763296-20060469F-Seg2-055-006-2015