At this point, I imagine some people will be thinking I am spouting some sort of sacrilege. They have bought the idea that money is speech. This is an idea promoted by moneyed interests, and sanctified by our courts. The Supreme Court has ruled so, so it must be so.
The Supreme Court can be wrong.
Money is not speech. Money is an amplifier of speech. I can speak, I'm doing so here. But how many will "hear" me? But if I had millions of dollars to spend, I could place this essay in major newspapers across the country. I could pay to have a professional production outfit turn this essay into a slick video advertisement. And then spend hundreds of thousands placing it in T.V. markets across the country.
Obviously money is NOT speech, it is an amplifier of speech.
When moneyed interests can spend to their hearts content, they can sway elections to their preference. While the overwhelming majority of the population is trying to make financial ends meet, the obscenely affluent can spend more in any given race than the voters will earn in a lifetime. This equation takes away any semblance of fairness, and places all political power in the pockets of a tiny minority of the population.
This problem is not new. For far to long the affluent have been purchasing political power through large campaign contributions, they contribute directly to candidates and to the parties. This money is not free. While contributors may not be able to completely dictate their desires to candidates or parties, we cannot be so naive as to think the contributors desires are ignored.
Recently there has been a brewing controversy over the issue of foreign money possibly being used to pay for political advertising. This is a valid concern. The idea of foreign interests attempting to sway our elections is vile to most thinking people. The logic is obvious.
But we all need to realize that it is just as wrong for a small domestic opulent minority to sway our elections. They have been purchasing political favor for far too long. Ask yourself if you think the Government is in any way responsive to your desires. Do you suppose that any of your friends or co-workers would say that they feel the Government is responsive to their needs? Now I ask you, do think the government is responsive to the desires of the Banksters? Or if I were to ask you, do you think that the major oil companies get their desires heard and considered, how would you respond?
Obviously this is a completely unfair system, in which the general population has been reduced to nothing more than profit sources for the financially powerful.
We all (most of us anyway) claim to embrace the idea of free speech. Free speech is seen as vital to the health of the republic. Yet in our present system the affluent are the only ones with a voice in our political process.
