The most complex special capacity of the government is when it functions, in one way or another, as the Subsidizer of the speech in question.[65] As a general rule, the government can itself say whatever it wants to, even if this "favors one viewpoint over another".[66] But, the government may not impose conditions on how subsidy recipients spend money they get from other sources.[67] If the government is using the speakers to express its own message, it is constitutional.[68] But this analysis changes if the government is trying to encourage a "diversity of private views indiscriminately". If it is indiscriminate, then under Legal Services Corp. v. Velazquez (2001), the government must be acting in a viewpoint-neutral way. However, if the government is basing some judgment of "quality" on the views, then only "invidious viewpoint discrimination" is barred.[69]