It seems to me like this FEC attempt to cripple the Club for Growth should wake up every American who believes that citizens have a right to participate in the electoral process.

The Federal Election Commission yesterday filed its first court challenge against so-called "527 groups," suing a powerhouse Republican advocacy group for violating campaign-finance laws from 2000 to 2004.

The FEC charges that the Club for Growth raised and spent at least $4 million more than the limit, and so the group should have had to register as a political committee and abide by donation and spending limits. The suit was filed in U.S. District Court in Washington.

"This litigation is an important test case on when 527 groups are required to register with the FEC and follow hard-dollar restrictions in federal law," said Michael E. Toner, the commission's vice chairman.

The 527 groups, named for the part of tax code that governs them, played a major role in the 2004 election, the first under the campaign finance rules that Congress passed in 2002. Those rules were intended to eliminate so-called "soft money," the large donations that political parties and interest groups used to flood the airwaves with issue ads.

Instead, the parties have to rely on limited "hard dollar" contributions.

The FEC justifies this action by saying that the Club for Growth refused to make a compromise agreement with the agency.

In the complaint, the FEC said it tried to work out an agreement with the club, but the organization would not agree to a remedy. The FEC is considering action against other 527s.

Any compromise would, of course, include limits upon the organization to engage in robust and unfettered political speech of the type envisioned by the Founders who wrote the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. I think that the groupÂ’s president, former Pennsylvania Congressman Pat Toomey, has it right when he describes this action as an act of war against the First Amendment. To compromise, which would effectively be a surrender, would be a betrayal of the Club for GrowthÂ’s limited government principles.

I think the solution that needs to be adopted here needs to be framed along the following language.

Congress shall make no law. . . abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press. . . .

Short, simple, and in harmony with our nation’s founding documents, this standard would make it clear that the FEC has only one task – closing up shop and ending its unconstitutional interference with the political speech of Americans.

Posted by: Greg at 02:04 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 433 words, total size 3 kb.