"McCAIN-FEINGOLD"--AN ATTACK ON YOUR RIGHTS.

The misguided "reformers" have struck again: Senators John McCain (R-Az.) and Russ Feingold (D-Wi.) have introduced the "Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2001" (S.27).

The First Amendment says "Congress shall make no law E abridging the freedom of speech E or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." But McCain, Feingold & Co. won't take "no" for an answer; they have become obsessed with "reform."

What's wrong with the bill? Let me quote NRLC's General Counsel, James Bopp, Jr.:

"McCain-Feingold 2001 is a major assault on the average citizen's ability to participate in the political process because it targets and imposes severe restrictions on two key citizen groups, which serve as the only effective vehicles through which average citizens may pool their money to express themselves effectively: issue advocacy groups [such as NRLC] and political parties. However, McCain-Feingold 2001 leaves wealthy individuals and candidates and powerful news corporations unscathed, thereby enhancing their relative power in the marketplace of ideas."

Who are the winners under McCain-Feingold 2001?

* Wealthy individuals. The bill can't touch them. They have enough money to make themselves heard, and they can set up foundations and buy media outlets that propagate their point of view.

* The news and entertainment media. The bill exempts them.

* Incumbent officeholders running for re-election. The bill makes it difficult to expose their voting records; and highly restrictive regulations about the funding, extent, and timing of educational and election campaigns make it hard to challenge them.

Who are the losers under McCain-Feingold 2001?

* Citizens of average means, like you and me. If we want to bring attention to an issue and "amplify our voice" in the public arena by joining others and pooling our funds with them (in NRLC, for example), the bill in effect muzzles us. Does it surprise you that billionaires and their foundations, the news media, and incumbent officeholders are in favor of campaign finance "reform"?

* Civic groups, advocacy organizations (like NRLC and NRL PAC) and labor unions. The bill restricts them severely, making it very hard for them to be effective participants in the public debate and provide independent channels of information. The "institutional" news media are all for First Amendment rights--for themselves, but not for some pesky pro-lifers and their organizations. Officeholders supporting the bill say they want to "control" the message of their campaigns. And if that means shutting you up in the name of "reform"--well, that's just the price they are willing to pay.

* Political parties. The bill hampers their ability to raise funds.

The sponsors of McCain-Feingold 2001 know, of course, that the First Amendment gives us the right to speak freely, associate with others, and spend money doing so. The clear aim of the bill is to strip this constitutional protection from issue communications/educational campaigns and independent election activities by redefining and relabeling them. This applies not only election-related activities, but also to lobbying in Washington and at the grassroots level.

Thus, constitutionally protected "issue advocacy" (such as "Ask Senator Cleland to vote for the Partial-Birth Abortion Ban Act"--in contrast to "express advocacy" statements, such as "vote for Bush" and "defeat Gore") would fall under crippling regulation by relabeling it as "electioneering communication."

And much that advocacy groups normally do--such as "discussing a candidate's message" or using the same polling firm--would be relabeled as "coordinated activity," and therefore trigger severe restrictions on all of their activities.

What does the constitution say? The U.S. Supreme Court noted in Buckley v. Valeo (1976), "Discussion of public issues and debate on the qualifications of candidates are integral to the operation of the system of government established by the Constitution. The First Amendment affords the broadest protection to such political expression in order to `assure [the] unfettered interchange of ideas for the bringing about of political and social changes desired by the people.'E [T]he constitutional guarantee has its fullest and most urgent application precisely to the conduct of campaigns for political office."

Affirming previous decisions, the Court further states, "The First Amendment protects political association as well as political expression. The constitutional right of association explicated in NAACP v. Alabama (1958), stemmed from the Court's recognition that `[e]ffective advocacy of both public and private points of view, particularly controversial ones, is undeniably enhanced by group association.' Subsequent decisions have made clear that the First and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee `freedom to associate with others for the common advancement of political beliefs and ideas, a freedom that encompasses the right to associate with the political party of one's choice.'"

With regard to issue advocacy, the Court ruled in Buckley v. Valeo, "Public discussion of E issues which also are campaign issues readily and often unavoidably draws in candidates and their positions, their voting records and other official conduct.E So long as persons and groups [avoid] expenditures that in express terms advocate the election and defeat of a clearly identified candidate, they are free to spend as much as they want to promote the candidate and his views."

Who supports McCain-Feingold 2001? The web site of "Americans for Reform" (www.americans4reform.com) lists, aside from Senators McCain and Feingold, the billionaire Warren Buffet and, among others, these organizations: AARP, American Heart Association, Campaign for America (a project of billionaire Jerome Kohlberg), Children's Defense Fund, Common Cause, Consumer Federation of America, League of Women Voters, National Council of Churches, Sierra Club, etc.

Go to the web site and find out if any of the charities and organizations you support are on that list. Write them in protest--and send NRLC a check. Defending the right to life and your constitutional rights is hard and expensive work.>EN