VikingsGuy
Well-known member
I feel like these arguments always end up focused on originalist or texturalist views vs pragmatist/living interpretations of the Constitution no matter what. And I can see the point of view where CU is a reasonable decision based on an originalist view but who honestly believes we are better off today with that decision? At what point do we acknowledge the limitations of the Constitution for predicting the extent of money and corporations' influence in politics?
The best thing that ever happened to “campaign reform” was CU. Without CU you would have have just seen even more creative structures, political gymnastics, direct billionaire funding and much of it simply being moved off shore given the global nature of communications in 2022. But with CU we can pretend their was a utopia within our grasp that the court denied us. We have had many forms of campaign reform at the state and fed level over the many decades - none amounted to anything more than a bureaucratic tangle that further distracted us from the real issues.