In a column yesterday in the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, Emily Mills argues, again, for a blatantly unconstitutional campaign finance scheme. She wants public financing with limits on expenditures. The law is clear that expenditure limits can be imposed on only on candidates who choose to accept public financing. It is also clear that expenditure limits cannot be imposed on those who those who refuse it. The law is clear that independent persons and organizations remain free to spend what they want.
But Mills apparently wants to go beyond that. She wants to stop spending and then permit it to continue on those terms that she approves of. As she puts it, she wants to kick everyone out of the pool and then invite every one back into the pool - if they'll play by the Mills Rules.
But the Supreme Court has said that you can't kick people out of the pool. You can't prevent people from combining their resources (although you can limit the size of contributions to candidates) and using them to express themselves on candidates and issues.
I do appreciate that people on the lament this robust protection of association and expression just as they increasingly oppose the rest of the First Amendment. The omelette of equality requires breaking a great many eggs, if you will.
But the law is what it is.
Cross posted at Purple Wisconsin.