With increasing nationwide crackdowns on political corruption, it seems hard to believe many interest groups still try to get their way, but that is exactly the plan of Wisconsin Right to Life. On June 30, the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case of WRTL and their fight to run a political advertisement against U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis., shortly before the 2004 election. Unfortunately for the group, what it did is against the law.
In a key provision of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002, any ad mentioning a candidate's name—called ""express advocacy""—within 60 days of a general election must be paid for by legal campaign money. Shortly before the 2004 election, WRTL tried to use corporate funds for ads opposing the filibusters of federal judges in which it asked viewers to contact Feingold—who was running for re-election—among other politicians.
In its fight, WRTL claimed the ads were general issue ads, which are not regulated by BCRA. When brought to appeal, a three-judge federal panel agreed and ruled the ads legal. Now, both sides look to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court to get a decision that could apply to the entire country.
The federal panel that ruled the ads legal was dead wrong. The difference between issue advertising and express advocacy advertising is often very small and many people find it hard to tell the two apart.
Voters have seen these issue ads before. They don't say vote for or against a certain candidate. They don't use the infamous ""I'm Russ Feingold and I approve of this message"" line. Instead they highlight one issue and urge viewers to contact their congressman and ask why they voted in a certain way.
When Barbara Lyons, WRTL's group executive director, said she believed the ad was meant to inform the public and would not affect the election, it is hard to take her seriously.
A decision in WRTL's favor would open a massive loophole in political advertising and would lead to even more unregulated money flowing into our political system from interest groups. We must stand behind Feingold's progressive ideals when he helped create BCRA and stop the corporate takeover of our government. We urge the U.S. Supreme Court to remember this.
