Money is Speech

"This paper will fight for progress and reform. We'll never be satisfied merely with printing the news. We'll never be afraid to attack wrong, whether by predatory wealth or predatory poverty."  
--Ed Hutcheson (Deadline U.S.A.)

In its McCutcheon v Federal Election Commission ruling last week, the Supreme Court struck down aggregate contribution limits to political campaigns.

The majority opinion authored by Chief Justice John Roberts viewed federal law that prevented donors from giving a maximum contribution to more than 10 candidates as an unconstitutional violation of First Amendment rights. Roberts wrote:

"Congress may not regulate contributions simply to reduce the amount of money in politics, or to restrict the political participation of some in order to enhance the relative influence of others."

Roberts correctly observed that influence is a "central feature of democracy" because constituents support candidates who "share their beliefs and interests."

Stated differently, influence drives political systems where majority vote rules.

The logical question to those who favor restrictions on campaign contributions is why should only monetary contributions be regulated? There are other ways to buy political favor.

For instance, why not regulate the editorial contributions made by media companies and other entities toward political campaigns? After all, large media efforts that favor certain candidates drown out the voice of the little guy on blogs and elsewhere. Surely a slanted piece presented by journalists at large media outlets possess political value for particular candidates. Because of their potential for outsized influence on democratic process, why shouldn't such journalistic contributions be regulated?

As this piece smartly observes, "How can anyone say - as people do say, as if this settles the issue - that 'Money isn't speech' and then, in the same breath, ask for money to spread the word about the danger to democracy posed by [big campaign contributors]? Money spent trying to spread a political message is speech, whether you like the message or not. More money is louder speech, that more people can hear."

As we have frequently observed on these pages, the way to reduce the impact of political influence is to cut off the resource stream available to government. If government had no power to take resources from some for the benefit of others, then the market for political favor withers.