With the 2024 elections gearing up, we’ll return to one of the topics that our participants keep circling back to—the role of money in politics.
- How much of a problem is the Citizens United decision, which provides that corporations and other outside groups can spend unlimited amounts of money on elections.
- Is the problem really with “corporate” speech, or is it “moneyed” speech (regardless of the form of the speaker)?
- Does money equate to speech? (Can money supporting speech be regulated without running afoul of the First Amendment?)
- Should wealthy people be able to purchase advertising (whether broadcast, cable, social media, “swag,” or otherwise) to express their views?
- Does it matter if those views are about an issue in general versus a candidate in particular? How can we tell the difference?
- Should anonymous speech be allowed, or should every speaker (or money behind the speaker, advertisement, etc.) be publicly identified?
- Bottom line: if this is a problem to be solved, how can it be done without infringing on other rights? Where’s the middle ground?