Free Speech and Spending

September 1975
National Review;9/12/1975, Vol. 27 Issue 35, p980
The article comments on the lawsuit brought by Senator Buckley and former Senator Eugene McCarthy against the post-Watergate campaign funding law in the U.S. Key issues discussed include restrictions on the ability of political candidates to spend their own money in political campaigns and the issues' implications for election law.


Related Articles

  • Election Law Miscellany: Enforcement, Access to Debates, Qualification of Initiatives. Lowenstein, Daniel H. // Texas Law Review;Jun99, Vol. 77 Issue 7, p2001 

    Analyzes several political campaign issues in the United States. Cost of accessing ballots for initiatives; Disagreement to the contention that the exclusion of minor parties in political debates in a two-party system of government violates the democratic process; Analysis of the approaches to...

  • Three Steps Forward, Two Steps Back. Miller, Ellen; Sifry, Micah // American Prospect;1/1/2001, Vol. 12 Issue 1, p8 

    Deals with importance of campaign finance reform legislation in the U.S. as of January 2001. Amount of money spent in the 2000 presidential elections; States which have reformed campaign finance legislation; Factors which hinder the reform of campaign finance legislation in other states such as...

  • Freer money.  // Hill;6/26/2007, Vol. 14 Issue 77, p32 

    The author reflects on the ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court related to the nation's campaign finance laws. The Court struck down the ban on corporations and labor unions buying television advertisements in the run-up to elections. The author explains that the court's decision will probably mean...

  • You be the Judge. Ralya, Gerald I. // Saturday Evening Post;8/13/1960, Vol. 233 Issue 7, p80 

    The article presents a court case in which a political candidate named Seymour, who once served three years for embezzlement, ran in a primary election for state representative seventeen years later and won. Hixby, who lost, sued to be certified as the nominee instead of Seymour on grounds that...

  • PUBLIC FUNDING AFTER DAVIS v. FEC: Is CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM THE STATES STILL LEGALLY VIABLE? Chen Li // George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal;Spring2010, Vol. 20 Issue 2, p279 

    The article looks at the legality of political campaign finance in the U.S. after the Davis v. Federal Election Commission (FEC) case. It examines the legal challenges brought against the state laws which help political candidates finance campaigns and curtail campaign spending, the logic that...

  • Matching Political Contributions. Overton, Spencer // Minnesota Law Review;2012, Vol. 96 Issue 5, p1694 

    The article discusses American political campaign financing, the matching of political contributions, and spending by political candidates as of May 2012. According to the article, several state and local governments in the U.S. have adopted laws regarding the distribution of equalizing funds to...

  • ARIZONA FREE ENTERPRISE CLUB'S FREEDOM CLUB PAC V. BENNETT: MONEY TALKS, MATCHING FUNDS PROVISION WALKS. Rahmanpour, Roya // Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review;Winter2012, Vol. 45 Issue 2, p657 

    Money's influence on politics has posed a problem for many jurisdictions. Arizona tried to combat this issue in part through the "matching funds" provision of its Clean Elections Act. This provision was part of a larger campaign-financing scheme; it allowed for additional campaign money to go to...

  • The Eternal Democratic Majority.  // National Review;1/31/1975, Vol. 27 Issue 3, p88 

    Discusses a campaign reform legislation that would restrict political contributions in the U.S. Comments on a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the bill; Impact of the bill on existing inequalities among political candidates; Comment that eliminating large contributions does not...

  • THE END OF CAMPAIGN FINANCE LAW. Kang, Michael S. // Virginia Law Review;Mar2012, Vol. 98 Issue 1, p1 

    The article presents the basics of campaign finance law of the U.S. and discusses the case Citizens United v. FEC and its impact on corporate electioneering. It explains the consequences of deregulation of independent expenditures created by Citizen United. The way for the regulation of campaign...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics