The More Dollars, the More Influence
Published in Berliner Zeitung
(Germany) on 3 April 2014
by Damir Fras (link to original)
(Germany) on 3 April 2014
by Damir Fras (link to original)
Translated from
by Maxi Benndorf-Brown.
Edited by Tess Chadwick.
From now on, there will be practically no limits for campaign donations in the U.S. This is very bad news for all Democrats.
Whoever has the money can influence politics. Whoever has more money can exercise even more influence. This logic has now been confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in its latest verdict. Going forward, campaign donations can be made practically without any limits. This is bad news for those who still believe that the differences between the rich and the poor are at least a little bit smaller at the voting booth than they are in real life.
But that way of thinking is over now. The verdict, which was pushed through by five conservative justices on the nine-seat court, simply states the following: Limiting the amount of allowable campaign donations, as was the case in the U.S. until now, restricts an individual’s right to freedom of speech. What sounds daring in theory will have severe consequences in reality. The power of money will only become greater. Which means that, conversely, whoever doesn’t have enough money for campaign donations will have a difficult time being heard.
Some people in the U.S. may now recall former Senator Alan Simpson’s remark that one needs to be quite naïve in order to believe that a donation of $100,000 has no impact whatsoever on a politician’s decision. Very true, senator. That is simply the difference between legal theory and legal reality.
Whoever has the money can influence politics. Whoever has more money can exercise even more influence. This logic has now been confirmed by the U.S. Supreme Court in its latest verdict. Going forward, campaign donations can be made practically without any limits. This is bad news for those who still believe that the differences between the rich and the poor are at least a little bit smaller at the voting booth than they are in real life.
But that way of thinking is over now. The verdict, which was pushed through by five conservative justices on the nine-seat court, simply states the following: Limiting the amount of allowable campaign donations, as was the case in the U.S. until now, restricts an individual’s right to freedom of speech. What sounds daring in theory will have severe consequences in reality. The power of money will only become greater. Which means that, conversely, whoever doesn’t have enough money for campaign donations will have a difficult time being heard.
Some people in the U.S. may now recall former Senator Alan Simpson’s remark that one needs to be quite naïve in order to believe that a donation of $100,000 has no impact whatsoever on a politician’s decision. Very true, senator. That is simply the difference between legal theory and legal reality.