PLEDGE NOW
Shaun McCutcheon On McCutcheon Vs. F.E.C.

On our Oct. 9 hour on the Supreme Court’s deliberations over limits to financial contributions in Federal elections featured a variety of voices and opinions, including the opinion of the McCutcheon himself of the case’s title. Shaun McCutcheon, an Alabama businessman who has actively supported Conservative political causes in and beyond his home state and who hopes to expand the number of candidates to whom he can directly offer money, filed suit against the Federal Election Commission in order to expand the number of individual races to which he could donate money.

McCutcheon spoke with host Tom Ashbrook about his reasons for bringing his legal challenge all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States.

It’s basic freedom of speech and right to political assembly. And again, this is about donating directly to, you know, as many candidates and committees as you choose. I don’t think you all have been talking about, say, a challenger who can’t self fund, but might be a great manager in politics. The challengers are the ones that have trouble raising money because of these limitations. And A lot of the candidates I donated to did not win, so I don’t see how you can call that influence when the candidate didn’t even make it out of the primary. I’m talking about supporting more candidates, including primaries and run offs and things like that.

McCutcheon stressed that concerns over the potential for the total removal of spending limits on Federal elections as a result of his case were overblown.

 

No I do not worry. This is a case about the aggregate limits, not the base limits. The base limits and the committee rules and the PAC rules all those things that are in place take care of the corruption argument. This is about donating to more candidates and more committees and spending your money however you choose…

This is about free speech. This is about getting your message out into the marketplace of ideas. All Americans are entitled to free speech. So you know, money does not necessarily guarantee that a candidate will be elected. It just allows them to advertise, ¬†and get their message out and allows people to get to know [sic] ’em and hear their ideas. This is promoting and improving democracy, not limiting it. This is about changing the world for the better…

Again, all Americans are entitled to free speech. Both sides — all sides, there’s more than two — have donors who can donate and advertise. This is about free speech. More speech and more ideas is not gonna hurt anything.

McCutcheon was very concious of some public criticism about his motives in the case — several members of Congress submitted amicus curiae, including Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) — and stressed that his aim in the case is to expand the aggregate number of races to which a donor can contribute.

Again, this is about more candidates and more committees. If say, my ninth race was an Alabama House race and I wanted to donate to a tenth Senate race in North Carolina in both the primary and… It’s about more candidates and more committees. This is about aggregate limits, not base limits.

McCutcheon — and many court reporters, for that matter — seemed to feel that the Justices were likely to rule in his favor.

Yes I found it very interesting. The humor was in the courtroom was inspiring, it exceeded expectations. I heard a lot of great ideas. I was very impressed with the Court and the process.

What do you think? Is that what free speech ought to mean? Blast away with all the bucks you’ve got? Will this Court endorse that vision of the American democratic process? Leave your comments below, or let us know how you feel on Facebook, Tumblr or @OnPointRadio.

Please follow our community rules when engaging in comment discussion on this site.
ONPOINT
TODAY
Feb 9, 2016
Host Tom Ashbrook and producer Sarah Platt speak to supporters of Republican Sen. Marco Rubio (FL) outside the candidate's Manchester, N.H. campaign headquarters on Monday, February 8, 2016. (Katherine Brewer / WBUR)

We’re live in New Hampshire for the first in the nation primary day, with all the latest on how the big vote is shaping up.

Feb 9, 2016
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump speaks during a campaign stop at a Rotary Club luncheon in Manchester, N.H., Monday, Feb. 8, 2016. (AP Photo/Charles Krupa)

From New Hampshire, a deep dive, from Trump to Sanders, on how the candidates would approach the U.S. economy.

RECENT
SHOWS
Feb 8, 2016
Legendary film critic  Roger Ebert in an archival image from his early days at the Chicago Sun-Times. (Flickr / WikiCommons)

The critic speaks. The New York Times’ A.O. Scott on how to think about art, pleasure, beauty and truth.

 
Feb 8, 2016
Sign stands outside property for rent Friday, Nov. 20, 2015, in south Denver. (AP Photo/David Zalubowski)

If it feels like rents are sky-high, you’re right. Some now paying more than half their income on rent. Some say crisis. We’ll dig in.

On Point Blog
On Point Blog
Notes From New Hampshire, #6: Bernie v. Hillary — The Electability Debate
Monday, Feb 8, 2016

Bill and Betty are not real New Hampshire voters. But their arguments about the Democratic race for President most certainly are.

More »
Comment
 
Notes From New Hampshire, #5: Ted Cruz — The Advocate
Monday, Feb 8, 2016

Texas Senator and Republican Presidential candidate Ted Cruz is an impassioned advocate, Jack Beatty writes — but mostly for himself above all others.

More »
Comment
 
Notes From New Hampshire, #4: Donald Trump — You Heard It First!
Friday, Feb 5, 2016

Jack Beatty recounts an evening rally with Republican Presidential frontrunner Donald Trump, and wonders if the billionaire businessman is really looking for an exit.

More »
Comment