Dave: To what end has my hand been tipped? I could easily write diametrically opposing essays, one of them explaining why banning soft money is a First Amendment issue, and one explaining why it isn’t. Reasonable conservatives can and do disagree on that point. The point you raise is far better: The prohibition on outside groups airing issue ads is a problem — UNLESS they are allowed to run the ads if they merely disclose the sources of their money. If the prohibition is merely a means to force sunshine, then it arguably falls within constitutional bounds. The point is that the constitutional issues aren’t as friggin obvious as Will or some other conservatives make it out to be. And it is perfectly possible for somebody to end up agreeing with Will while still acknowledging good arguments on the other side — and to acknowledge that until very late in the 1990s, the constitutional issue had not yet been raised very forcefully, and it was still quite possible for SOME of the provisions of McCainiac reform to look like good ideas.
Notice to Readers: The American Spectator and Spectator World are marks used by independent publishing companies that are not affiliated in any way. If you are looking for The Spectator World please click on the following link: https://thespectator.com/world.