Arizona laws which give matching dollars to publicly financed candidates for office when their privately funded foes spend more are legal, a federal appeals court ruled today.
In a unanimous decision, the three-judge panel of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals rejected claims by challengers - including the state treasurer and several legislators - that the provision of the voter-approved financing scheme violates their First Amendment rights. The challengers, all of whom ran with private donations, said it's wrong for the state to give more money to their political foes just because they have more cash.
Today's ruling overturns the conclusion of U.S. District Court Judge Roslyn Silver who had voided the law.
The filers of the suit said that the matching funds provisions of Clean elections infringed on their free speech rights.
I say that the provision only infringes on their abilities to buy elections, something that is *not* protected under the U.S. Constitution.
For the first time in a long time, common sense won out in a matter related to Arizona. Enjoy the moment...