re: The McCutcheon decision, money as speech, and the end of corruption

quote:

---

If I give you money tomorrow because I approve of what you fight for, that's not bribery.

---

That's correct.

quote:

---

If, on the other hand, I ask you to vote a certain way in return for money, that would be bribery.

---

That's also correct, but not under McCutcheon decision logic, which is the problem.

Because McCutcheon unequivocably (albeit not explicity) defines giving money as speech then we can logically rephrase your scenario thusly:

"If, on the other hand, I ask you to vote a certain way in return for urging you to vote a certain way, that would be bribery."

I have replaced your "money" with the speech it's supposed to represent according to the McCutcheon decision, and, as you can see, it leads to a logical absurdity. No, it WOULDN'T be bribery. The McCutcheon decision leads to absurdities.