Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-wg55d Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T16:21:04.420Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

For the Plaintiffs: The Honor and Humility of Defending Political Parties in Court

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 October 2004

Ray La Raja  and
Sidney M. Milkis
Ray La Raja
Affiliation:
University of Massachusetts, Amherst
Sidney M. Milkis
Affiliation:
University of Virginia
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

How did two political scientists, both lifelong Democrats, end up working for the Republican National Committee (RNC)? We did so with more than a little trepidation and only after consulting extensively with each other and our friends. Many considerations influenced our difficult decision to join the plaintiffs as expert witnesses in McConnell v. FEC, but the most important factor was that we shared a long-standing commitment to the party system and feared that the Bipartisan Campaign Finance Act (BCRA), the most significant campaign finance legislation to be passed in 25 years, marked the dangerous culmination of a regulatory regime, born of the Progressive era, that weakened the parties' ability to engage in those activities that have made them so important to the working of constitutional government in the United States. Moreover, we predicted that BCRA would shift money and the balance of power away from political parties and towards interest groups, with serious consequences for American democracy.

Type
Symposium
Information
PS: Political Science & Politics , Volume 37 , Issue 4 , October 2004 , pp. 771 - 776
Copyright
© 2004 by the American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Holman Craig B., and Luke P. McLoughlin. 2001. “Buying Time 2000: Television Advertising in the 2000 Elections.” New York University School of Law, Brennan Center for Justice.Google Scholar
Krasno Jonathan S., and David E. Seltz. 2000. “Buying Time: Television Advertising in the 1998 Congressional Elections.” NewYork University School of Law, Brennan Center for Justice.Google Scholar
Lane Charles. 2003. “McCain-Feingold Decision Appealed: Sen. McConnell Challenges Lower Court Ruling on Campaign Finance Law.” Washington Post, May 6.Google Scholar
La Raja Raymond. 2003. “State Parties and Soft Money: How Much Party Building?” In The State of the Parties, eds. John C. Green and Rick Farmer. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.Google Scholar
Menand Louis. 2001. The Metaphysical Club. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.Google Scholar
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission, 251 F. Supp. 2d 176 (D.D.C. 2003).Google Scholar
McConnell, United States Senator, et al. v. Federal Election Commission et al., slip opinion, December 10, 2003, No. 02-1674, Stevens and O'Connor, p. 35.Google Scholar
Milyo Jeffrey. 2003. “Campaign Finance Regulations and Political Efficacy: Evidence from the States.” Paper presented at the Department of Politics, University of Virginia, September 24.Google Scholar
Ornstein Norman, and Anthony Corrado. 2003. “Hard Money Is Easy to Come By.” New York Times, September 5.Google Scholar
Putnam, Robert. 2003. “APSA Presidential Address: The Public Role of Political Science.” Perspectives on Politics, 1 (June): 249–55.Google Scholar
Schattschneider E. E. 1960. The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America. Fort Worth, IN: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.Google Scholar
Smith Bradley A. 1995. “Campaign Finance Regulation: Faulty Assumption and Undemocratic Consequences.” Cato Policy Analysis, September 13.Google Scholar
Sorauf Frank J., and Jonathan Krasno. 2003. Court Declaration in McConnell v. FEC.Google Scholar