Before yesterday's Supreme Court ruling, the virtually enslaved rich few in the U.S. could just barely purchase enough free speech each election cycle to make a real difference. This egregious problem which, yes, only affected a handful of very rich Americans, troubled Chief Justice Roberts greatly. After all, what good is all that money if it can't speak freely....as our Founding Fathers intended.
Silly people through the years have insisted that too much money in politics leads to corruption. Of course that's total foolishness....because as we've learned in the John Roberts School For Billionaire Legacy Building.....money equals free speech, and how can any true patriot ever expend too much free speech, right?
Here are the enslavement chains which, before yesterday, stifled the free speech spending of the rich few.....
For the 2013-2014 election cycle, Federal Election Commission rules state that a donor can give no more than $123,200 to all political committees, with two sub-limits of $48,600 to candidates and $74,600 to political parties and political action committees. Those limits are no more.
With paltry aggregate-speech donation limits like that, no wonder Americans can barely hear the voice of the wealthy in their country anymore. I mean, how can we know what to do, whom to elect, which foreign countries to invade, what tax rates should be and so forth....if aggregate speech donation limits on the richest few prohibit them from speaking louder than a whisper?
And so, the five Justices selected by conservative presidents to remodel our republic to look more like the Monopoly game board decided to set new, higher aggregate free speech spending limits.....
...a single donor can now give more than $5 million in individually limited contributions to every House candidate, every Senate candidate, every state party committee, every national party committee and every leadership PAC connected to one political party.
Now that's some free speech a wealthy oligarch can use. So much freedom and liberty broke out yesterday when the Justices severed the slavish chains holding down the speech of a tiny group of billionaires that I submit that yesterday's date, April 2nd, should be considered as our new national independence day.
And what will be the, surely, unintended consequences of such a wisely-decided outbreak of liberty?
This will immeasurably help the Republican Party, which relies far more on large campaign donors who give the maximum campaign contributions.
As you know, the Supreme Court has never been a political body. Never. So I'm convinced that Roberts, Alito, Thomas, Scalia and Kennedy never once gave a passing thought to how their liberty-explosion ruling would benefit one major political party over the other. Perish that thought before you become too cynical.
Right on cue, the enemies of freedom and liberty, as they always do, responded to yesterday's ruling by using "class warfare" language......
Public Citizen president Robert Weissman said in a statement, "This is truly a decision establishing plutocrat rights. The Supreme Court today holds that the purported right of a few hundred superrich individuals to spend outrageously large sums on campaign contributions outweighs the national interest in political equality and a government free of corruption."
Money equals free speech.....and as we all realize, free speech doesn't corrupt anything....because it's only speech. Corruption in the political process could be understood as a variation of "pay to play"......where a citizen, you know, bribes an elected official with cash and expects something in return. But, you see, corruption like that is impossible when we're talking about free speech.
Back in the free-speech enslavement days of 2002's McCain-Feingold, a not-Roberts-led Court, in it's ruling, stated that campaign donations led to “privileged access to and pernicious influence upon elected representatives."
Seriously, how silly is that? Every one knows that when billionaires donate very large bags of free speech to individual campaigns those billionaires are not looking to "influence" those candidates or gain "privileged access." Those billionaire patriots and big time "speakers" donate all those large sums out of their allegiance to and love for America's democracy....not because they are trying to get something in return for all those free speech donations.
With yesterday's new explosion of Jeffersonian democracy.....billionaire speechifiers will no longer be limited in how many House or Senate races they can donate their free speech to. And why shouldn't local House representatives be chosen for us by the out-of-state free speech money of a few billionaires? What could possibly be wrong with such a system?
Just look at the progress towards full-liberty that we've already made. Money now equals free speech......and corporations are now people....perhaps with religious consciences to boot. Isn't it high time for all of us to acknowledge that huge amounts of money in our political process, donated by a tiny group of very rich Americans, can not possibly lead to corruption?
John Roberts thinks so.
About This Blog