Nancy Pelosi may Have Violated Campaign Finance Laws

 As much as I would love to use this news to bash Nancy Pelosi, I am going to use it to bash John McCain instead. I am sure I may be able to find a little time to bash Nancy Pelosi before I am done writing.

 Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrich have been running a national commercial about saving the planet from global warming. Before I get into the possible ramifications of this commercial I just wanted to say how disturbed I was and still am that Newt Gingrich agreed to do this commercial. It seems as though more and more people that I thought we could count on to slow down the alarmists from stealing our money are turning to the dark side. Now Newt appears to have joined in on the hoax. It is either that, or he is taking a page out of John McCain’s reach across the isle and appease the Democrats approach to politics. Either way it doesn’t bode well for the future of the party. Not to mention the fact that the commercial was paid for by Al Gore’s “non profit” group. What is Newt thinking? I am hoping it was Newt’s plan to do this commercial with her because he knew that is was illegal for Pelosi to run this ad. A setup, but I know that isn’t true.

 Anyway, because a special election was going to be held within a month after the commercial began airing, it may be illegal.

Under the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 – popularly known as “McCain-Feingold” and which passed with Pelosi’s support — the degree to which a candidate’s campaign can work with an independent group for a commercial is limited. The rules are set on content and conduct for any political commercial. Content rules can apply to the use of a candidate’s name, for instance, while conduct is determined by what role the candidate had, if any, in planning the production of the commercial.If a candidate is found to have helped plan an ad run by an independent group and the ad mentions the candidate’s name, it could be against the law.

In Marxist-Leninist vocabulary, the term described the appropriate “party line”, the “correct line”. A similar term was used in the People’s Republic of China.

 But this is where perhaps the fissures in John McCain’s conservatism began to surface. He considers this restriction of free speech as not only good and necessary but also as one of his greatest accomplishments. And people wonder why conservative won’t get behind him.

 Well, I can’t let this post go by without talking about Nancy Pelosi’s part in all of this. While I don’t think that she broke this campaign law on purpose and I don’t think it could possible have benefited her in any way politically, she still has to be held accountable for her actions. She was a huge supporter of the campaign finance reform bill and as such she should have known what she could and couldn’t do.

Pelosi strongly supported the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002 that banned soft money contributions, while restricting the political advocacy of independent groups. Proponents of the bill said it would clean up politics from the influence of big money, while critics feared it violated the First Amendment.

In a Feb. 2, 2002 statement before the bill was passed, Pelosi said, “A vote for real campaign finance reform will end the corrosive influence of special interest money and level the playing field so that all Americans can participate.”

Intentional or not, Nancy Pelosi, the speeker of the house, of all people should have known what she was doing could be wrong. If she is found to have violated campaign finance reform laws whether she meant to or not, she needs to face the full punishment, not just a slap on the wrist.