In Expression vs. Equality, J. Tobin Grant and Thomas J. Rudolph argue that although public opinion plays a vital role in judicial rulings on the legalities of various finance reform options, political scientists have yet to realize fully the complexities and nuances of public attitudes toward campaign financing. The issue of campaign finance reform exposes a real conflict between the core democratic values of equality and expression. Economic inequalities, reformers argue, allow certain groups and individuals to exert undue influence in the political process, thereby threatening the democratic value of political equality. Opponents tend to frame the issue as a question of free speech: restrictions on campaign contributions are viewed as a threat to the democratic value of political expression. In the context of campaign finance, how do committed Americans rank the importance of equality and expression? How do they resolve the conflict between these competing democratic values? The answers to these questions, say the authors, depend heavily on whose influence and whose rights are perceived to be at stake. Using a series of unique experiments embedded in a national survey of the American electorate, they find that citizens' commitment to the values of expression and equality in the campaign finance system is strongly influenced by their feelings or affect toward those whose rights and influence are perceived to be at stake. Freedom of speech is more highly valued in contexts where the respondent agrees with the issue in question; equity, on the other hand, is more highly valued when the respondent disagrees with the issue. These findings have implications not only for the continuingpublic debate over campaign finance reform, but also for our understanding of how citizens make tradeoffs between competing democratic values.
Expression Vs. Equality: The Politics of Campaign Finance Reform
Modern Power and Free Speech takes a socio-political approach to question the application of the First Amendment in cases dealing with the speech rights of disempowered groups.
Includes responses and discussion. No index. Annotation copyright by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR
In this book, a marvel of conciseness and eloquence, Fiss reframes the debate over free speech to reflect the First Amendment's role in ensuring public debate that is, in Justice William Brennan's words, truly uninhibited, robust, and wide ...
Only Words is a powerful indictment of a legal system at odds with itself, its First Amendment promoting the very inequalities its Fourteenth Amendment is supposed to end.
... The Rise and Fall of Jim Crow, 1865–1964 (Danbury, CT: Franklin Watts, 1969), 56–57. 113. George de Huszar, Equality in America (New York: H.W. Wilson, 1949), 8. 114. See, for example, Leon Friedman, Southern Justice (New York: Pantheon ...
Assuming familiarity with basic theories of free expression, this book addresses the implications of reasonable disagreement between legislatures and courts about whether a specific measure violates freedom of expression, the implications ...
See also religious contexts; transformation of discriminatory beliefs Frost, Vicki, 98 full reflective revision, 60 funding of democratic persuasion. See subsidy power Fung, Archon, 195n36 gag rule, 122–23 gay rights, 32,40, 96; ...
Carlos A. Ball argues that as progressives fight the First Amendment claims of religious conservatives and other LGBT opponents, they should take care not to forget the crucial role the First Amendment played in the early decades of the ...
This collection explores these and related questions. Drawing on expertise in philosophy, sociology, political science, feminist theory, and legal theory, the contributors to this book investigate these themes and questions.