Read these words carefully, as this is what Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) and his Democratic Party cohorts want to replace the current protections afforded by the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution with:
Section 1. To advance democratic self-government and political equality, and to protect the integrity of government and the electoral process, Congress and the States may regulate and set reasonable limits on the raising and spending of money by candidates and others to influence elections.
Section 2. Congress and the States shall have power to implement and enforce this article by appropriate legislation, and may distinguish between natural persons and corporations or other artificial entities created by law, including by prohibiting such entities from spending money to influence elections.
Section 3. Nothing in this article shall be construed to grant Congress or the States the power to abridge the freedom of the press.
Now think about the term “political equality.” What does this seemingly lofty goal mean?
In the context of the U.S. Constitution and the future interpretation of it, those words are like a gun to the head of political freedom.
{mosads}The current guarantee of the individual “right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances” would be eviscerated by the Democrats, should their vision for the future of the First Amendment win the day. Here’s why.
Currently, citizens are guaranteed the right to use one’s resources to protect oneself from egregious government action. If the government creates a law which hurts your capacity to make a living, you have the right to fight back by using all of your resources should you choose to inform the public about the wrongheaded decision and seek changes. However, under the Democrats’ proposed political equality standard, Congress could limit your activity to not exceed the activity that the least wealthy person in America could afford to take. After all, political equality demands that no person have the ability to exercise more influence than another. Of course, they assure The New York Times that their right to unequal influence will remain intact. But if you don’t own a media empire, Congress can hold you to this lowest common denominator political equality standard.
This blatant attempt by Senate Democrats to shut down the ability of political opponents to have the funding needed to deliver opposing messages is transparent, dangerous and would lead to the end of the great American experiment in freedom.
Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has already forced a Senate Judiciary Committee vote on the proposed rewrite of the First Amendment by offering substitute language containing the words:
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”
Democratic Senators on the committee voted against this — the exact language of the First Amendment that has served to protect those freedoms.
This week, Harry Reid will bring a vote to the floor on his party’s castration of the First Amendment’s most basic protections of the ability to challenge government actions. America should rise up and demand that the Senate reject this assault on freedom.
Manning (@rmanning957) is vice president of public policy and communications for Americans for Limited Government. Contact him at rmanning@getliberty.org.