Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.): 'I Think the Constitution is Wrong'
During a debate with his Republican opponent Marty Lamb, Massachusetts Democrat Jim McGovern said he thinks the Constitution is wrong in regards to campaign financing.
We have a lousy Supreme Court decision that has opened the floodgates, and so we have to deal within the realm of constitutionality. And a lot of the campaign finance bills that we have passed have been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. I think the Constitution is wrong. I don’t think that money is the same thing as human beings.
In the question and answer section of the debate an audience member apparently asked McGovern about his remark. He promptly denied ever making the comment in the first place.
To check out his response and see the second video, head on over to the Eyeblast.tv blog for more.
- EyeBlast.tv Staff's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
In his overall defense, the
Submitted by Guttermouth's Return on Thu, 10/14/2010 - 4:55pm.
In his overall defense, the Constitution was so imperfect that it only had to be amended 27 times.
Then why doesn't he propose
Submitted by NL207 on Thu, 10/14/2010 - 10:55pm.
Then why doesn't he propose to amend the 'imperfect' Constitution instead of simply passing laws which contravene it in the hopes enough liberal activist judges sit on the courts to allow these laws to stand?
Brilliant argument
Submitted by ckc1227 on Thu, 10/14/2010 - 9:49pm.
"I don’t think that money is the same thing as human beings."
Neither is a television, or a computer, or pencil and paper.
I think everyone will hate my
Submitted by Rusty Shackleford on Thu, 10/14/2010 - 11:53pm.
I think everyone will hate my opinion on this. I believe nearly all campaign finance and advertising laws are illegal and/or a complete waste.
In DC we have 435(?) members in the House, 100 senators, and 1 president. That's 536 people who are more-or-less elected by the public. Senators are around for 6 years, the president for 4, and a House critters only get 2. The point is, no matter how corrupt a politician ends up when they're in office they aren't going to be in for very long.
If the people would spend a tiny amount of effort on our elections these corrupt people would get booted out in only a few years. If the Consitution was followed then power wouldn't be as centralized and no single individual would really even have all that much power while in office.
It seems to me that things like campaign finance laws and term limits are bandaids that can't really fix the problem that we have a population that doesn't really care.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Matthews: The Joy Behar of MSNBC.
Bill Maher: The Joy Behar of HBO.
Paul Krugman: The Joy Behar of The New York Times.
Your last statement is teh
Submitted by Dan The Man 2 on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 12:03am.
Your last statement is teh key, the populace really doesnt care as long as they are taken care of or things dont change drastically. its smszing that in the early days people still got elected and the money flowed into their coffers with few if any restrictions.
I say all campaign contributions should be disclosed completely. If we do that then those who are interested can make informed choices and those who prefer to be sheep will continue to do so.
The issue is based in the foundation of the USA
Submitted by c5then on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 9:57am.
Free speech. Even if you disagree with what someone is saying, should they still be allowed to say it? There is a reason that Freesom of Speech is the first thing mentioned in the first amendment to the Constitution. Without that we are not free at all.
Anyone or group is allowed to express their opinion or view on any issue at any time. That has to be upheld, or else it violates the first amendment. The Supreme Court has ruled that monetery contributions to a political campaign are the same as speech and therefore cannot be enjoined by the government.
Personnaly I think that monetary contributions are not the same as free speech because any person or group should have the right to say what they want to at anytime. therefore restricting monetary contributions to a political campaign does not in anyway prevent anyones free speech. However, because of influence possibilities and corruption concerns, I think that contributions to a political campaign should be restricted to only those individuals who can cast a vote in the election.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Well I think the big deal
Submitted by DontFeedTheTrolls on Fri, 10/15/2010 - 2:08pm.
Well I think the big deal here is the lie that the first statement was never said. These people do this, say something stupid, then deny saying it, over and over.