Last week the Supreme Court struck down overall limits individuals can contribute to candidates and political committees during a two-year federal election cycle now.
The ruling resulted in a divided Supreme Court with a prevailing 5-4 vote stating in part, that overall limits on campaign contributions could not survive First Amendment scrutiny and was a violation of free-speech rights.
"There is no right more basic in our democracy than the right to participate in electing our political leaders," Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. wrote in the court's main opinion. "We have made clear that 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."
You've all heard the adage money is power and following this ruling those with money will have a louder megaphone to influence the outcomes of future elections. Spending one's money is a form of free speech and donors have the right to spend as they wish; my broader concern of a drowning out of the greater populace voice that doesn't have the deep pockets which could result in the election of candidates that are preferred and funded by the wealthy minority but necessarily representative of the majority.
Candidates should win on principle, character and plans for the future … not on how many commas are in their bank account. This ruling might blur the lines between the two.
Copyright 2014 WSFA 12 News. All rights reserved.