i'd like to have the two debaters come up, mr. bopp and mr. bonifaz. this is different than the previous sessions. this is going to be a modified debate, if you will. we're going to be debating the topic of campaign finance and citizens united decision. the backdrop for all this is as you know in 2010 the supreme court issued the landmark citizens united decision and more recently in april of this year -- talk about timeliness. when we were planning this conference we had no idea that we were going to get hit with another supreme court decision on issues involving money in politics. so we're really entering a brave new world concerning the financing of political campaigns. i really have the distinct privilege of moderating the debate between john bonifaz and james bopp. they are two of the nation's leading authorities on the subject of campaign finance laws and the effects of the supreme court decisions on our political process. i could speak for a long time about each of them. rather than to bore with you that, please read your program. please google

i'd like to have the two debaters come up, mr. bopp and mr. bonifaz. this is different than the previous sessions. this is going to be a modified debate, if you will. we're going to be debating the topic of campaign finance and citizens united decision. the backdrop for all this is as you know in 2010 the supreme court issued the landmark citizens united decision and more recently in april of this year -- talk about timeliness. when we were planning this conference we had no idea that we were going to get hit with another supreme court decision on issues involving money in politics. so we're really entering a brave new world concerning the financing of political campaigns. i really have the distinct privilege of moderating the debate between john bonifaz and james bopp. they are two of the nation's leading authorities on the subject of campaign finance laws and the effects of the supreme court decisions on our political process. i could speak for a long time about each of them. rather than to bore with you that, please read your program. please google

mr. bopp, you have ten minutes to make an opening statement. >> thank you very much. >> i must admit, i'm one of those ajegents of the corporate and big-money interest sense. wisconsin right to life, citizens united and, most recent mccutchen case were all my cases. and, of course, in those cases, i was representing an advocacy group in whenisconsin who all t wanted to do was lobby their incumbent members of the senate and to encourage them not to filibuster president bush's judicial nominees. and, of course, they ran square into mccane feingold's blackout period which made it illegal to run any ad that simply mentioned the name of a candidate for federal office. aened what they wanted to do was to urge the public to contact them about an upcoming vote in congress. now, you might wonder why is it that congress would pass such a blackout ad. people might come together in average groups. that's the only way they can participate coming together as a group. why is it that congress thinks it's outr

this is for mr. bopp. mr. bonifaz, you can weigh in on this as well. mr. bopp, do you believe there should be sealing on the amount money that a corporation or union can contribute to a political campaign? i guess kind of a corollary to that is do you think that money that is contributed has no influence on how a length lgislr other official react snz. >> right now corporations and labor unions can be prohibited from contributing to candidates. citizens united involves independent speech, not contributions. contributions are also subject to a lawyer -- a lower standard under the laws as far as allowing contribution limits to be had. i do think that they are abysmally low. i'm very involved in the republican party. say to republican groups, you can't buy a democrat congressman for $2,600. the anecdotal evidence it is takes six figures. william jefferson of new orleans, had $99,000 in cold, hard cash in his freezer. he went to jail to be bipartisan. duke cunningham, from san diego, if you came in for an earmark of a weapons stem -- he was chairman of the arme

mr. bopp, it sounds like that was a summation. you can have another minute. >> i can always say something else. >> i'm sure you can. as most lawyer's prerogative, they like to talk. mr. bonifaz, anything to say in summation? >> yes. as i make a summation, i would just say that there are many unions that support this constitutional amendment because they recognize that they cannot compete with exxon and mobile and chevron in the political process. they need to have an equal playing field. as far as where we are going with this overall movement, dr. king said the arc of the moral universe is long but it bends towards justice. when we look at what happened in the poll tax case before the supreme court, we have to remember that was in 1966. earlier before that, there was a case brought in 1937, a group of poor voters challenged the poll tax, a fee charged to voters to vote. they got to the supreme court. they lost. the supreme court said it was necessary to charge these fees in order to faerret out the frivolous voter. if you were a tr