As if it wasn't big enough contradiction for a big "C" Conservative to propose a tax initiative, Rep. Campfield wants to put the squeeze on erotic speech and press with his Adult Materials Tax. ;)

Rep. Campfield doesn't have any idea that his tax initiative infringes the Constitutional protections of speech & press. IMO the ARKANSAS WRITERS' PROJECT v. RAGLAND [1] case reads that way, but please read it and decide for yourself. (481 U.S. 221 [2] (1987)).

This week, Rep. Campfield made several posts about his tax initiative including the one that finally got me commenting at his blog. The last was one of those roundup entries. It was just too much ...

and I'm home with a little seasonal sinus problem, so following a week of his proclaiming the movement of his Porn Not Corn tax, hand in hand with Terry Frank's [3] blog, I took my turn. The exchange from Campfield's site is here [4] or here [5]

Rep. Campfield, in our exchange, explains to me that a tax on speech is constitutional if it doesn't kill it completely [6]. In other words, Campfield believes the government can tax your speech and press, decrease sales of your newspaper, drive up the price of your magazine, and depress your livelihood just because of the type of speech you make.

What kind of conservative can agree to limitations on freedom for the benefit of a tax initiative? And yet, that is exactly the bill that Campfield is set on passing. I don't think he's ever passed one of his ideas into legislation but perhaps the tax on speech will be his first. In any event, I've come to a conclusion.

Some Conservatives should sharpen up on the basic principles.