Nominee Keith Rothfus Defends Unlimited Corporate Spending In Elections As Free Speech

[cal04]

GOP House Nominee Keith Rothfus Defends Unlimited Corporate Spending In Elections As Free Speech

ThinkProgress filed this report from Cranberry Township, PA.

In the wake of ThinkProgress’s report detailing how the U.S. Chamber of Commerce is accepting foreign money into the same general account that it uses to fund partisan attack ads, candidates from across the political spectrum are stepping out and calling on the business lobby to disclose its funding. An increasing number of politicians are also calling for an FEC investigation into the Chamber’s actions.

However, for the Republican nominee in Pennsylvania’s 4th congressional district, those calls for transparency are falling on deaf ears. ThinkProgress spoke with Keith Rothfus, a Tea Party favorite, during a meet-and-greet in western Pennsylvania last week. We asked him if he would like to see groups like the U.S. Chamber forced to disclose where their funding comes from. He refused to endorse the idea, arguing instead that such requirements would likely breach the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech:

TP: I know you’d mentioned that you were opposed to the DISCLOSE Act, but would you like to see outside groups like the Chamber be forced to disclose where their money’s coming from?

ROTHFUS: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. When Congress starts to tinker with free speech rights of Americans and starts to make laws that abridge the freedom of speech. Our representatives to Congress take an oath to uphold the Constitution. When the First Amendment says, “Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech,” and they pass a law like McCain-Feingold, I’m wondering if they read the First Amendment. I’m going to be very exacting when it comes to defending the right of people to speak.

TP: Would you like to see current campaign finance restrictions rolled back in terms of limits on people’s speech and money?

ROTHFUS: As somebody who has learned how difficult it is to raise money, there is a problem. There is a problem with the way we fund campaigns in this country.

TP: Do you think that the current campaign finance laws are contributing to that incumbent-challenger disparity in terms of fundraising?

ROTHFUS: This is a little different year because it’s a wave year that’s building out there, but I think in the normal sense, yeah, there is an incredible disadvantage that challengers have.

TP: So you might like to see those (campaign finance laws) kind of altered or rolled back?

ROTHFUS: Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. That is the major premise. And I will operate under that major premise.

Watch here: http://thinkprogress.org/2010/10/25/rothfus-campaign-finance/

[geckosfeet]

1. corporations are NOT citizens and not entitled constitutional protections

Especially if they have/maintain offshore facilities.

[Angry Dragon]

2. So he says it is okay to say anything you want

and be able to hide behind any walls you want.

And money is speech. So the more money one has gives you a louder voice.

The man is an ignorant pus

[SoCalNative]

3. I believe the only way to effectively limit donations

by corporations or anyone else is to set a spending limit per candidate per election.

Set the limit at $25,000 per candidate, and there will be no big corporate donations or annoying TV and radio advertising every election season.