U.S. Supreme Court prefers monied speech to liberated speech  |
June 28, 2011 | 2 Replies  The U.S. Supreme Court has continued
its project of creating coin-operated elections in America, with
its decision in the Arizona case of McComish v. Bennett. The
Supreme Court struck down a provision of the Arizona law that
would increase state candidate financing when an opponent of a
clean money candidate financially increased his or her stake in
dirty money. Here’s how the stricken provision was described in
the Court’s syllabus:  They are also granted additional matching
funds if a privately financed candi- date’s expenditures,
combined with the expenditures of independent groups made in
support of the privately financed candidate or in op- position
to a publicly financed candidate, exceed the publicly financed
candidate’s initial state allotment. Once matching funds are
trig- gered, a publicly financed candidate receives roughly one
dollar for every dollar raised or spent by the privately
financed candidate— inclu