Money is Power…and Apparently Speech Too

 

Last week the Supreme Court ruled that individual Americans can now blow unlimited amounts of money on federal campaign contributions that elect officials who do absolutely nothing.

The problem with this decision is not purely the fact that it facilitates unequal opportunities for the average American to participate in politics, but it also signifies to the world that our nation cares more about living by its lofty principles than living by common sense.

The court argued that donating money is a form of free speech and thus cannot be restricted, despite the fact that money and speech are not equal forms of free expression. Everyone can speak. Not everyone can donate thousands or millions of dollars to influence politics. I can assure you the founding fathers did not foresee this interpretation of the First Amendment.

It is the classic battle between America’s two favorite words, freedom and equality. The difference between these lofty ideals is that unlimited freedom opens the door to anarchy whereas unlimited equality opens the door to…well maybe the America we all wish we lived in.

Regardless, the Supreme Court has decided that unlimited freedom is somehow more important than equal opportunity. The issue here is that if we allow the wealthy to spend unlimited amounts of money on campaign donations, to candidates who will supposedly create policy for all Americans, we are inherently creating an unequal opportunity for the average American to influence politics. Instead of our elected officials controlling our government, it will be the wealthy Americans who put these officials in office.

It also makes absolutely no sense for Americans to be spending billions of dollars on federal campaigns, especially when this money has gone to elect the most partisan Congress since the Civil War and the most ineffective administration in my lifetime. These spiteful creatures do not deserve a single dime of our money when they are unable and unwilling to pass a single piece of legislation.

Furthermore, it is almost comical to think that a country that is trillions of dollars in debt has decided that one of the best uses of its money is to elect officials who would exist regardless of this money. Imagine if we put the billions of dollars spent on campaigns toward paying down our debt, instead of spending it on elections for the very officials who put us in this debt.

There is no logical reason for allowing these absurd amounts of money to be spent on campaigns, except to say that on principle, we cannot allow any regulation that restricts our freedom. But take this to its extreme, and we should not be able to restrict anything. Let us just bend the words of the Constitution to suit all our fancies, say that all acts of life are expressions of our free speech, and let us live in a world with no limits on anything. The implications of this case go far beyond campaign finance; they signify that America would rather be a country of principle instead of one of practicality.

America should not just cap election donations, but it should completely do away with such funding. Instead, we should move toward the type of elections held in Europe, where the government gives each candidate the same amount of money to spend on a campaign that can only last a few weeks prior to the election. It keeps the focus of the election on the issues and policies, rather than the nonsense that comes up during American elections. Most importantly, it creates an equal playing field for all candidates and all voters. Taxpayers finance the campaigns, so everyone is contributing and no one entity has more influence than another.

Alas, this type of campaign finance reform is probably far off if not impossible to imagine ever coming to fruition in America, especially in our current state of affairs. Instead, we will just continue to live as one nation, under the one percent, with liberty and injustice for all.

Hope for Afghanistan’s Women

In a conservative, Islamic nation like Afghanistan, it is beautiful to see the progress women have made in such a short time period. Since the end of its Taliban regime in 2001, women have gained greater access to education, employment opportunities, and most importantly political power. With Afghan laws now reserving quotas for female seats in the country’s parliament and provincial councils, political participation by women has soared in just twelve short years, with roughly 40% of the votes in the past two elections cast by women.

This Saturday, the nation will choose a new president, one of whose running mate is a woman and another whose wife has taken an active role in campaigning with him. Furthermore, all three presidential candidates have vowed to uphold women’s rights as part of their platforms. This is truly amazing when you realize that a little over a decade ago women were not even allowed to work outside of the home in Afghanistan, and now they are full, participating members of their nation’s democracy.

Of course, the country still has a long way to go before its women truly have equal rights. In more rural areas, many women are still banned from leaving the home without a male companion. Furthermore, women are still largely outnumbered in Afghanistan’s political process, not that this is any different in most other countries.

With the political climate the way it is, it will also be interesting to see whether the nation will not only be able to maintain its stability, but whether its leaders will actually be able to maintain democratic power. Going along with this will be whether or not the nation will be able to maintain the strides it has made in securing more rights for its women.

However, now that these ladies know what it’s like to live in a world with rights, there is no chance that they will give them up without a fight.