Transcript
THOMAS MANN: It's often said we are a 50/50 nation, evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, ideologically polarized. Three years ago, the Supreme Court handed down a stunning 5:4 decision that, ultimately, was followed by George Bush being elected President of the United States.
Yesterday, another 5:4 decision that surprised many, although, certainly, not all members of this panel, in the reach and clarity of its findings on the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, otherwise known as McCain-Feingold.
Now, the broad shape of the decision is well known. The Court has upheld the twin pillars of the new law: the abolition of party soft money; and the regulation of electioneering communications or what the reformers like to call "sham-issue ads."
Now, the press was filled with its initial coverage of the decision. Our purpose today is to better understand what the Court decided and on what grounds and to ruminate about its significance for campaign finance law more broadly.
Now, we'd also like to say a bit about the potential impact of the law in now affirmed by the Court on campaign finance practice, but much of that is conjectural at this point. Although, reading the newspapers this morning, it looked like statements of fact about who would win and who would lose. We will engage some of those this afternoon.
Read the full event transcript. (PDF—97KB)
View Full Transcript »