U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Watershed Campaign Spending Limits Case

U.S. Supreme Court to Hear Watershed Campaign Spending Limits Case

Sweeping Campaign Finance Reform Possible in Randall v. Sorrell

Boston, MA - Today marks an historic opportunity for the Supreme Court to consider anew whether carefully drawn campaign spending limit laws are constitutional. The Randall v. Sorrell case offers the Court the opportunity to open the door for a sea change in the way American elections are funded by declaring that reasonable campaign spending and contribution limits are constitutional.

As a recent poll commissioned by the National Voting Rights Institute (NVRI) revealed, many agree the current system is unfair and chronically flawed. A remarkable 87% of voters support caps on campaign spending as a way of improving the fairness, honesty and integrity of elections.

The Court had ruled in Buckley v. Valeo in 1976 that recently passed limits on Congressional campaign spending were unconstitutional. This is the first time the Court will have considered the question of spending limits since that time. The Court will also be reviewing the limits on the size of contributions under Vermont's law.

NVRI Executive Director Stuart Comstock-Gay said, "In this case, the Supreme Court faces an extraordinary opportunity. For nearly three decades since the Buckley ruling, the nation has witnessed the threat posed to our democracy by unlimited campaign spending. The Jack Abramoff scandal shows once again that the never-ending need for more and more campaign money creates a constant temptation to go down a wrong path."

-snip-

http://www.nvri.org/updates/e-updates/update_special2_february_2006.html