Sen. Lou Correa attacks free-speech rights

Dec. 5, 2012

By John Seiler

Campaign finance “reform” always means one thing: attacking the other guy’s funding sources under the guise of “good government.”

That’s happening with a bill by state Sen. Lou Correa, D-Santa Ana, to reveal so-called “dark money” contributions. This is supposed the end the problem from the last campaign of contributions coming from unknown Arizona donors to California initiatives and Republican candidates. Except that it didn’t take long for the donors to be revealed. And the donors are unlikely to repeat their action because they lost on every campaign.

So it’s another typical California charade of a solution seeking a problem. And get this:

“Working with Fair Political Practices Commission staff, Correa has crafted Senate Bill 27, which would apply existing state campaign disclosure laws to nonprofit donations if the nonprofit is less than two years old, gave more than $500,000 in its first contribution to a California-regulated campaign, or has been giving donations to California campaigns in the last calendar year or four previous years.”

So a state bureaucracy cooperated in making its bureaucratic function more powerful. And the “reform” makes California’s already labyrinthine campaign laws even more complicated. Meaning fewer real people — that is, non-government functionaries or campaign consultants — will get involved in the whole mess. The insular Establishment, which in California now exclusively means Democrats like Correa, gains even more power at the expense of the “little guy.”

And free speech rights overall are reduced.

Welcome to clean government!


Write a comment
  1. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 5 December, 2012, 08:17

    I have to wonder how much regulation a state can put on any campaign money, even when the source is unknown, user Citizens United. They might run into 1st Amendment issues under federal law……..but who knows. I personally don’t think corps and unions should be allowed to give the massive amounts they do give.

    Reply this comment
  2. Hondo
    Hondo 5 December, 2012, 08:45

    I would agree only if they make outa state union money illegal. Heck, make all union money and corperate money illegal.

    Reply this comment
  3. Dyspeptic
    Dyspeptic 5 December, 2012, 09:44

    Self interested bureaucrats conspiring with politico’s to expand their regulatory purview – I’m sure only good things will come from that. Hey those carpetbaggers in Arizona deserve it, right? We all know carpetbagging is evil, except when Democrats like Hillary Clinton do it to get a Senate seat, then it’s OK. We need double standards in politics because consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.

    Reply this comment
  4. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 5 December, 2012, 11:55

    McCain and Finegold tried to reform campaign contribution laws, with no success. The Supreme Court’s Citizen United case has made a mockery of the process. The question surrounding the “Dark Money” issue was, when I first read about it, one related to possible illegal money laundering. I thought that the AG’s office was going to look into that. If the people behind the, “Dark Money” can be legally outed, I am with Correa. We found out that the Mormon and Catholic churches were spending heavily to pass Prop.8–we ought to know who was against the people of CA with Props. 30 and 32. Fortunately, the right side won.

    What Hillary Clinton did in NY was legal according to the laws of NY–same process that was used in NY by Robert Kennedy.

    Reply this comment
  5. Rex the Wonder Dog!
    Rex the Wonder Dog! 5 December, 2012, 16:58

    SeeSaw says:
    The Supreme Court’s Citizen United case has made a mockery of the process.

    It is a niracle, the stars have aligned, seesaw made her first decent and intelligent comment!

    Right now seeesaw!

    Reply this comment
  6. Donkey
    Donkey 5 December, 2012, 17:31

    SeeSaw, the Catholic and Mormon churches did not spend a dime on prop 8. The members of these organizations and many others organized, walked, and contributed to the victory of prop 8 as individuals. 😉

    Reply this comment
  7. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 5 December, 2012, 17:50

    Under the guidance of, and at their direcions to their respective members–doubt you can know for sure that they did not contribute from the coffers.

    Reply this comment
  8. Donkey
    Donkey 6 December, 2012, 06:06

    Unlike the RAGWUS,from which you feed, people that gather at private sector groups seek rational and logical results to the world around themselves, unlike the world of government.

    In typical fashion of a Marxist you lie in post #4 and then in post #7, after I called you out, you try to cover your lie with a generalization. This is no surprise to me SeeSaw, knowing from what you write you have no scruples stealing from the taxpayers, thus your assult on entire groups to which you have no affiliation.

    Reply this comment
  9. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 6 December, 2012, 09:35

    No lies at all there, Donk. Look it up. I am a taxpayer and I don’t steal from others. My religious upbringing was Catholic–I am Baptized and Confirmed–so I am qualified to speak on issues regarding that Religious Order.

    Reply this comment
  10. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 6 December, 2012, 09:45

    Have you ever been a public sector employee, Donk? Just wondering–you must have been one for quite some time, since you claim to know enough to qualify you to verbally assault public employees, 24/7.

    Reply this comment
  11. Donkey
    Donkey 6 December, 2012, 17:13

    SeeSaw, I owned my own business, and I have had many dealings with irrational RAGWUS feeders over the years looking for nothing but cash for doing said business in the fat bureaucrats home city. I have also spent time on the financial review commitee(FRC)of my city, which opened my eyes to the depravity of the typical RAGWUS operative.

    It is in this setting, as a member of the FRC that I was enlighted to the dealings of the RAGWUS and their intent to steal the wealth from the private sector for their own financial gain, leaving as little as possible for the private sector workers.

    One does not have to be a part of the RAGWUS feeding frenzy to knhow of its evil my dear!! 🙂

    Reply this comment
  12. SeeSaw
    SeeSaw 6 December, 2012, 19:46

    Your city must be a little backward. Most entities use professional auditors to conduct the financial revues.

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

Prop. 31 would have ended California’s republic

Nov. 9, 2012 By Wayne Lusvardi How could all of the following so-called impartial ballot guides miss a key controversial

Election Night Live Blogging

CalWatchdog will be reporting and live blogging tonight as election results come in. We’ll be at various election events and

Prop 29 shaping up to be fiscal disaster

May 25, 2012 By Katy Grimes What do stem cell research and cancer research have in common? In California, both