PORT TOWNSEND — A planned debate about a recent Supreme Court ruling that allows unrestricted corporate campaign contributions hit a snag after the sponsor couldn’t find anyone to present an argument in favor of the decision.
But the debate will go on as planned by the League of Women Voters/Jefferson County.
The free event will be at 7 p.m. Thursday at the Masonic Temple, 1338 Jefferson St., Port Townsend.
“We will still shine a light on both sides of the issue,” said Jackie Aase, chairwoman of the Jefferson County chapter.
“I don’t want to discourage people from attending because one of the panel members won’t appear.
“It will be an informed discussion and both sides will be represented,” she said.
In response to the Supreme Court’s January decision, Aase began planning this week’s debate in March, inviting the American Civil Liberties Union to send a representative to argue in favor of the decision.
The ACLU first accepted, and then canceled last week.
Aase then attempted to book a replacement speaker, contacting lawyers and other advocates inviting their participation, with no luck.
“I talked to a lot of people who could argue the position, but they had already made other plans and could not participate in the debate,” she said.
She asked Steven Reiser, an attorney who was already scheduled to present a viewpoint against the ruling, to argue both sides.
Reiser agreed, saying that he is familiar enough with the ruling to do so.
Here are both sides, according to Reiser, beginning with support of the decision:
“More speech is better, and when you regulate speech it will not be good for the population.
“Many groups that are not-for-profit groups should have the opportunity to participate without restrictions.”
And against:
“The ruling favors a free-market economic system as applied to speech, with less government and fewer regulations.
“That didn’t work with the banks and it won’t work for speech.”
Reiser, incidentally, thinks the Supreme Court action is “a horrible decision,” but said he can still argue both viewpoints.
“I can present some thought-provoking discussion on both sides,” he said.
Aase has her own viewpoint, which opposes the Supreme Court ruling.
“Most people haven’t even heard of this and don’t think that it affects their daily lives, ” she said.
“But there is a huge potential here for a corporation to put in an elected official by controlling the media.
“If it is a multinational corporation, you could have a foreign national sitting on the board and exerting control over our government,” she said. “This is contrary to what the founders of the Constitution intended.”
For more information, phone 360-385-6027 or e-mail aase@waypt.com.
________
Jefferson County reporter Charlie Bermant can be reached at 360-385-2335 or at charlie.bermant@peninsuladailynews.com.
