Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge James Emerson ruled yesterday that limits on campaign contributions by independent political committees violate those committees’ freedom of speech. According to City Attorney Rick Doyle, the ruling effectively invalidates the city’s existing soft-money contribution limits, capping individual contributions to campaigns at $250. In August, the City Council voted to maintain the cap.
The ruling comes at the end of a three-year suit brought by Cindy Chavez, who argued that the Chamber of Commerce violated the cap in the 2006 mayoral election, when its political action committee COMPAC donated in excess of $250 to the campaign of her opponent, Mayor Chuck Reed. While the election committee ruled that COMPAC did in fact exceed the limit, COMPAC challenged the decision, saying that it violated their freedom of speech. They were later fined $5,000, but they took the ruling to the State Supreme Court.
Regardless of the decision, political consultants say that the additional money paid by COMPAC was not the reason for Chavez’s defeat.
Read More at The Mercury News.
Cindy who?
I hope the court also ruled that the loser must pay the winner’s attorney’s fees and costs.
JMO,
Good grief, don’t you think that just being her is penalty enough?
Courts have now confirmed that wealthy individuals and special interests with hundreds millions to spend have legal free speech right to buy massive amounts of media time for their consultants to twist truth, tell half truths , smear candidates and run anti proposition campaign with paid signature gatherers effective buy elections and special interest sponsored California propositions
Votes and democracy can now legally be easily bought, higher taxes and legal robbery by corporations imposed on poor and middle class and more tax giveaways to Wall street, banks and wealth you have the money, newspaper, tv and radio stations control and consultants –
Let the all out – money driven class warfare begin – more rob from the poor and give to the rich by bought and paid for millionaire politicians
This is allows for balance of power to the Unions
If unions have stranglehold, why is membership down or they lost most local elections
Do you consider unions wealthy the same or more than Wall Street, banks and wealthy who rob from poor and give to rich
If so, don’t vote for union candidates
You have free speech and SJI blog so rather than sloganeering – tell us what they do wrong
Awaiting your wisdom
> If unions have stranglehold, why is membership down or they lost most local elections
Public employee union membership is up.
Industrial union membership is down.
Industrial union membership is down because industrial union leaders are stupid.
The SEIU and the CTA own and operate the California legislature.
The George Soros, Goldman Sachs, and the SEIU own and operate Barack Obama. The AFL-CIO stupidly supported Hillary. (They put their money on the wrong nag.)
Industrial unions need healthy manufacturing businesses to provide jobs. Manufacturing businesses need cheap and abundant energy to make things.
George Soros, the government unions, the Sierra club, and the global warming quacks basically told the industrial unions to get screwed. “We got what we want, and we don’t need you anymore.”
Screw manufacturing. Let the Chinese make stuff.
Screw cheap energy. It upsets the trust fund children at the Sierra club. And paper pushing doesn’t require much energy.
Screw union benefits. They’ll get government healthcare and be happy to have it. And the government bureaucrats who administer the “public option” will all be SEIU anyway.
Screw you industrial unions. We don’t need you anymore.
Um, it was San Jose that lost the lawsuit, not Cindy Chavez. The city, by several majority votes of different councils, put these spending limits in place. COMPAC broke the limit, but sued the city claiming the limits themselves are unconstitutional. COMPAC (SJ Chamber of Commerce) won the suit and the city lost. Why make this another attack on Cindy Chavez, which is a favorite past-time of this and other forums?
COMPAC filed the lawsuit in the first place, so the idea that the losing side should be responsible for legal fees is ridiculous.
This is a more fundamental question than whether or not an individual candidate lost or won an election. It is about whether or not a city (or any jurisdiction) can limit the size of contributions. For now, the Superior Court Judge said no.
David: Unfortunately this board is full of people with nothing better to do than bitch about everything under the sun. There is very little constructive discussion. Just a bunch of puffery from over-inflated egos.
A person spending a single afternoon volunteering achieves more than these people do with a thousand posts. Pretty sad they don’t use their energy to solve the problems they complain about.
Boy, do you have that right. It seems most of these folks have never served on a city board or commission or done anything to try and make things better. Of course, if you count sniping from the sidelines as contributing, then these folks are stellar citizens.
It is too bad this blog can’t contribute more cogent ideas that might actually improve conditions. Instead, most folks—and they know who they are—are content to blame everything on liberals, illegals, and politicians. There is plenty of blame to go around but pointing fingers does not solve problems.
Maybe this blog can regroove itself for 2010 and actually serve some other purpose in addition to being a sounding board for angry, mostly uninformed, zealots.
Just a thought for the new year.
You know WHY this blog has become a “sounding board for angry, mostly uninformed zealots”?
It’s because you liberal pussies run away and hide instead of sticking around and actually debating these things we angry conservatives are pissed off about. Overly sensitive, getting your feelings hurt, you have abandoned this site, only to dart in with a snide remark occassionally, and then skulk off- too cowardly to stick around and substantiate your argument.
But take heart, liberal wimp. You’ve got the Federal Government, the State Government, and local Government to protect you from big bullies like me.
Thanks for making my point, John. Glad to see you are trying to improve the level of discourse here. With responses like yours, why would I or anyone who has actually done something to improve San Jose waste their time trying to have a sensible discussion with you or your pals?
If and when you can get past your nastiness (“liberal wimp”?) perhaps your perceived enemies will return. What was either liberal or conservative about what I wrote? Nothing. You don’t seem to want actually have a discussion but rather continue your angry-guy tirade.
Have fun. I will work to make SJ a better place. Let me know what you plan to do besides bitch.
Re-read your post. I think it might explain why people over 12 might not want to engage in discourse with you.
Grow up already!
Here’s a great local volunteer organization that offers a variety of volunteer opportunities:
http://www.handsonbayarea.com/HomePage/index.php/home.html
It is easy to talk, give mostly worthless opinions and not do the hard work to improve our community
Try Volunteering to serve on city Boards, Commissions Task forces, clean up your neighborhood or help people in need
If SJI ( San Jose Idiots ) closed down today few would miss it and it contributes little
Mostly talkers , Few Doers, Mostly worthless comme said, “It is easy to talk, give mostly worthless opinions and not do the hard work to improve our community
Try Volunteering to serve on city Boards, Commissions Task forces, clean up your neighborhood or help people in need”
Amen! It’s true, there are a lot of agencies that need help, donations, and skilled folks to make this a better place. I love volunteering! It makes me feel like I’m giving back to a community i love. Try it, you might like it!
SJI is definitely dysfunctional. It is not a healthy environment for constructive discussion. My guess is that if you were to throw a San Jose Inside picnic, it would look something like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j_ekugPKqFw
If SJI ( San Jose Idiots ) closed down today few would miss it and it contributes little
Actually, it does serve a useful purpose. As with any Internet forum, the right wing lunatic fringe soon takes over, starts shouting down any reasoned discussion, and the intelligent leave. SJI helps identify the local lunatic fringe.
Volunteerism is wonderful, if done for the right reasons and under the right circumstances.
Personally, I will NEVER volunteer for anything that aggrandizes any redistributionist politician.
Anyone who spends his or her days changing bedpans for spaced out drunks or drug addicts in a homeless shelter only to enable some politician to take credit for inventing a volunteer bedpan changing program is a fool.
It is just mindlessly accepting the pathologies of homelessness, alchoholism, drug addiction, etc.
I prefer to spend my volunteer energies questioning and resisting the destructive policies advocated and supported by politicians who tolerate, accomodate, and foster behaviors that lead to avoidable human misery.
Don’t save a miserable, homeless, drug addict; PREVENT a miserable, homeless, drug addict.
Preventive medicine theory . . . hard to argue with.
But realistically, we are going to do a little of both.
Wow, the doofinator gets more offensive every day. Because you don’t like politicians who try to help those less fortunate, you won’t even directly help the less fortunate. Do nothing, let them die, that’s seems to be the response to most of our problems these days from folks like this.
I’m curious though what the community service opportunities that PREVENT people from being homeless drug addicts are that the doofinator recommends we volunteer.
> I’m curious though what the community service opportunities that PREVENT people from being homeless drug addicts are that the doofinator recommends we volunteer.
You mean you really don’t know?
Why don’t you ask the nearest adult.
That’s it, Doofus? That’s your well reasoned, thoughtful response? Do you have a clue about social services and the needs of a community? Many of these ills are well beyond good parenting. Sometimes people are sick and need help regardless of how good or bad their parents were/are. Are you really as heartless and clueless as your posts imply? For your sake and ours, I hope not.
> Many of these ills are well beyond good parenting.
How do you know?
Have you experienced good parenting? Have you ever even seen good parenting?
This isn’t rocket science. Study after study confirms that good parenting reduces social pathology. Even brain damaged liberals will admit this under waterboarding.
Social pathology would be REDUCED if we dismantled patronizing and paternalistic “social services agencies”, encouraged and supported marriage and intact families, and institutionalized losers who have been indoctrinated to believe that abortions or drugs are the solutions to their personal problems.
Doofus: Since you have resorted to name-calling, perhaps an answer in kind will be better received. You are probably too dense to understand that the statement “well beyond good parenting” isn’t mutually exclusive from “good parenting reduces social pathology.”
Surely even the craziest conservative recognizes that while good parenting is important, there are other external factors that have an effect on success in society. And only the heartless would say that if somebody is unfortunate enough to lack strong parental direction, then we should abandon them. Circumstances, such as parents needing to work multiple jobs to get by, parents dying at an early age, or parents not having enough education themselves, results in some having a disadvantage. You seem to be suggesting that even in circumstances where the child is not at fault for these lackings, it is somehow their fault that they end up needing help, and we should therefore not help.
As others have said, heartless and clueless. But worse then that, it is bad for society. It will end up costing you more to clean up the mess created by desperate people that you so callously refuse to help before they get desperate.
Well, Doofie, I certainly understand why you don’t use a real name. I wouldn’t want to associate my name with the nonsense you espouse either.
Clearly, there is no common ground with you on which to have any kind of a coherent discussion so I’ll let you continue to wallow in your ignorance while I try to improve our community.
You’re right.
I really am a deplorable, inadequate person.
What can I do to be more like you?
Doofus
a stupid incompetent simpleton dimwit, half-wit, nitwit person
Ummm. I see.
My feelings are hurt.