Monday, April 21, 2008

Rich guy having a fit

marjorie says...

The New York Times editorialized today that the Supreme Court should not strike down the "Millionaire's Amendment," a federal campaign finance law that's triggered when a candidate for the House of Representatives spends more than $350,000 of his own money. The amendment allows his opponent to then raise triple what is normally allowed from individuals.

Jack Davis, a wealthy man who ran for office in 2006 in New York with his own money, is challenging it, saying that it "it “chilled,” or discouraged, his speech, and that it deters wealthy people from running for office or spending their own money on their campaigns."

The New York Times notes that Davis was able to spend as much as he wanted, and adds this classic comment: "The amendment simply adds to the total amount of speech by making it easier for less-wealthy candidates to be heard."

The NYT is dead-on. Indeed, money does equal speech in a world in which media is largely profit-driven.