Campaign Finance Reform Versus The First Amendment

The way you spend your money says something about you as a person. You make a statement every time you go to the grocery store and buy certain products, or go to the movie theater and choose to see one movie over another. Even if you ever say a word about the products you bought at the store, or give a review of the movie to friends and family, you speak through your purchases. Most people understand this.

The principle is the same when it comes to politics—if anything, it is even more accurate. It is possible to buy a product or spend money to see a movie once, just to see if you like it. But no one ever gives money to a politician or political cause simply to “see if they like it”. If I donate money to Ted Cruz’s reelection campaign, or to the Senate Conservatives Fund, or to Planned Parenthood for that matter, I am expressing my true beliefs in those particular causes. Hence the term, “putting your money where your mouth is.”

But that is exactly what most proposals for campaign finance reform seek to limit. By having individual spending limits, and byzantine restrictions on how private individuals can spend their own money on worthwhile political causes, the federal government is essentially restricting the constitutional guarantee to freedom of speech.

And yes, corporations are people too. What is a corporation, after all, but a group of people? American citizens do not suddenly lose their constitutional rights when they gather.

Obviously, political campaigns are a trillion-dollar industry. In any such industry, there must be at least a few general rules and regulations to protect the integrity of the process. But limiting individual contributions to $2,700 per federal campaign? $5,000 per year to a political action committee? Many people, myself included, would never dream of donating that much to any political cause. But that is not for the government to decide. If one is looking to ensure the strength of the First Amendment’s free speech clause, then targeting so-called campaign finance laws would seem a good place to start.