Supreme Court is Right on Campaign Finance

The Supreme Court’s opinion in McCutcheon v. Federal Election Commission is an important development for campaign finance regulation and a victory for those who support the 1^st amendment.

As far as legal opinions go, McCutcheon is pretty easy to read. Essentially, the bottom line is that the government has limited constitutional authority to restrict campaign contributions. The government cannot limit campaign finances unless the limit is directly related to preventing corruption.

“Money in politics may at times seem repugnant to some, but so too does much of what the First Amendment vigorously protects. If the First Amendment protects flag burning, funeral protests, and Nazi parades – despite the profound offense such spectacles cause – it surely protects political campaign speech despite popular opposition,” wrote Justice Roberts in the majority opinion.

The logical reasoning is simple. The “base limits” on contributions only allow a donor to give a maximum of $2,600 to a candidate. These limits are only permissible constitutionally if they prevent “corruption or the appearance of corruption.” Thus, any amount under $2,600 is assumed to be non-corrupting. So if a donor wishes to give $2,600, a non-corrupting amount, to many different candidates, how is a limit on the number of candidates justified for the purpose of preventing corruption?

Regardless, the government still has a burden to use the “least restrictive” way to accomplish their goal – preventing the circumvention of the base limits. There are many other ways to accomplish the same objective without an outright ban on aggregate political contributions.

For example, Congress could pass a law further limiting transfers between candidates and party committees or limiting the “earmarking” of committee donations for candidates. Or Congress could increase disclosure rules.

Democrats are quick to condemn the conservative justices as intentionally giving a victory to wealthy people for political reasons – but the facts tell a different story. According to OpenSecrets’ “heavy hitters” list for political contributions over the last 25 years, the top 16 organizations give to primarily Democratic causes or split equally. One doesn’t find a true Republican-leaning organization until the 17^th place on the list.

Though Sen. Harry Reid loves to vilify the Koch brothers, the truth is that they don’t even appear on OpenSecrets’ top individual contributors list. Instead, the list is dominated by those donating to Democratic or liberal causes.

What’s most important to remember is that giving the existing government power to limit the campaign contributions of their challengers is dangerous. Justice Roberts says it best: “those who govern should be the last people to help decide who should govern.”