According to an OC Register editorial ran last week, Proposition 89 will Ã¢â‚¬Å“level the playing field, allowing candidates without access to big money to compete, and centering campaigns on ideas rather than money.Ã¢â‚¬Â
Those are their words.
Would you be surprised to learn that the faux-libertarians that write editorials at the Reg. came out in opposition to prop 89? Opposing clean money & fair elections.
The editorial team consists of right-wing neocons that fake libertarianism in hopes that it will make them appear intellectual.
HereÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s the biggest argument made in their piece:
A more fundamental objection is that limits on contributions and spending by political campaigns are limitations on freedom of political speech – the kind of speech the First Amendment was most specifically designed to protect. Elections should be about the people telling the government what to do, but if government regulates elections tightly the people’s options become limited.
The loophole of this logic is that in the current system, the amount of money raised dictates how much Ã¢â‚¬Å“political speechÃ¢â‚¬Â a candidate can make. Just ask State Assembly candidates Paul Lucas or Ryan Gene Williams.
And to say that this proposition would limit the peopleÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s options is to completely ignore whatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s happened in Arizona and Maine; they have had similar reforms in place for over 6 years. Things have gone swimmingly for those statesÃ¢â‚¬â€voters have a more varied choice of candidates to choose from and more and more people are turning out to vote.[Prop 89Ã¢â‚¬â„¢s website] [OC Register Editorial] [Clean Elections @ Wikipedia]