Another limit lifted gives big money more sway: #tellusatoday

On Wednesday, the Supreme Court decided that limits on total donations to all political campaigns are unconsti- tutional. Letter to the editor:

I have been around politics long enough to remember why campaign spending limits were created in the first place ("Supreme Court lifts ban on aggregate campaign donations").

The total amount a person could donate to candidates and committees during an election cycle was a response to the abuses of Watergate. The theory was, if aggregate totals were capped, then spending limits would create better government.

The trouble is no one has ever proved this hypothesis to be true. It is for this very reason that I, a lifelong Democrat, applaud the Supreme Court's decision to void the overall limits on political donations.

Denny Freidenrich; Laguna Beach, Calif.

Comments from Twitter and Facebook are edited for clarity and grammar:

I'm probably somewhat thick-headed, but I can't really figure out how more money equates to free speech!

— @tab91787

Bank robbery will be legal very soon.

— @TRSkull

It's a true victory for free speech in America. Bring down the nonsensical big government barricades.

— @CutGovtSpending

More corruption! Who wants to buy a member of Congress with me?

— @david_k927

The Roberts Supreme Court has once again ruled that donating money equates to exercising free speech.

But when the wealthy are allowed to sway elections through their donations, doesn't that reduce (and thus limit) the First Amendment right to free speech of the less wealthy?

— Rich Barnes

This decision doesn't limit the free speech of people who can't afford big donations because the medium and scope of the speech is irrelevant to one's ability to exercise it.

The voice of others does not constrict your own; each voice doesn't have to be given equal weight.

— Will Foltz

Finally, private donors will have the same power of influence as the unions. A victory for free speech and individual Americans.

— Anne Gerr

How is allowing unlimited spending not infringing on free speech rights of everyday Americans? The average American's voice is being drowned out by big money. There is a reason some states have publicly funded elections with equal limits for all candidates. We need that system to be more widespread if we ever want to regain control of our government.

— Chuck Michael

Anybody can write an opinion instantly accessible to all free people in the world.

It seems to me the playing field is more level than it has ever been.

— David Fairchild