Campaign Finance Reform and Free Speech

Originally appeared in the Cincinnati Enquirer, December, 2003

If they ever exhume the body of Thomas Jefferson and find him laying face down, there is a good chance that he assumed that posture on December 10, 2003. That is the date that the U.S. Supreme Court drove a stake through the heart of the First Amendment by upholding a key provision of the McCain-Feingold campaign finance law that bans special interest groups from running issue ads just before an election. Old Mr. Jefferson surely rolled over in his grave.

In one fell swoop, the court sharply curtailed the meaning of free speech, as well as the right to peaceably assemble and to petition government for a redress of grievances. For what is a special interest group if not an assembly of citizens with a common cause, brought together to petition our leaders. These are basic rights that are central to a free society.

Some may argue that the attack ads that have become so commonplace are not what our founding fathers had in mind when they drafted the Bill of Rights, but in today’s electronic age, TV and radio have replaced the town square as the primary meeting place where ideas and issues are discussed. The Court’s ruling that the Constitution does not guarantee us a place in this marketplace of opinion marks a dark day for liberty.

In a society as large and dispersed as ours, the individual voice is lost among the barrage of messages coming from all directions. But just as a chant at a crowded sporting event gives a unified voice to the masses, so does a special interest group give a voice to us as individuals. Whatever our pet cause, be it pro-life, pro-choice, the environment or social security, we multiply our impact when we come together as one. That is just as the founding fathers intended when they granted us the right to peaceably assemble and voice our opinions freely.

We have no one to blame but ourselves as we watch our liberty stripped away from us. Those that are rejoicing that special interests have had their comeuppance need to realize that the political parties and the politicians themselves still have access to vast sums of cash that they can use to fill the airwaves. That they can speak, but we are forbidden to do so, smacks of an almost Orwellian system. We risk becoming a society with a ruling class free to say whatever they want the people to hear, while we the people are excluded from the debate.

What can be done? Well, in the good old days, like-minded freedom-loving people could have united to air ads that point out the politicians who are working to dismantle our freedoms. But today, we will just have to hope our leaders have our best interests at heart. I wouldn’t count on it.