Judge Strikes Down Campaign Finance Rules

[Rose Siding]

WASHINGTON - A judge has struck down more than a dozen of the government's current rules on political fund raising with just weeks before Election Day, concluding federal regulators improperly weakened the nation's campaign finance law.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly ordered the Federal Election Commission (news - web sites) to write new rules to govern key aspects of fund raising, including when candidates and outside parties can coordinate activities.


The judge did not specifically address how candidates and political parties in the heat of current campaign should act in the absence of the rules. The law's main provisions, banning most large donations, are unaffected. But issues involving coordination must be addressed by regulators, for example.
............

The decision was a victory for the lawmakers who sponsored the 2002 law and accused the FEC of weakening some of the restrictions on big money. A campaign watchdog group hailed the ruling.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/ap/20040920/ap_on_el_pr/campaign_finance

[Rose Siding]

1. Big repub loss here

:kick:

[w4rma]

2. nice. (nt)

[FatSlob]

3. I'm still shocked that BCRA wasn't struck down.

The Supreme Court should have nailed it as Unconstituional.

[Almost_there]

4. Does this affect MoveOn.org and MediaFund?

The part that was sort of glossed over was the "coordination" aspect of the reform. What did the ruling really say about that? The aspect of keeping soft money out is definately a blow to Bushy, but, wasn't that already the case? Soft money I thought couldn't mention a candidate on either side, just sort of "Vote Democrat in November" sort of thing.

Maybe I misread the article, but, I thought it said that the candidate can now coordinate with a 527? Is that correct, or am I lost?

~Almost