A Government of Laws and Not of Men

Over at the Wyoming Liberty Group, I've written extensively about campaign finance reform and its danger to the First Amendment. Through Republic Free Choice, I'd like to examine this theme a bit more deeply.

John Adams once expressed the familiar phrase that ours is a "government of laws and not of men." This statement means that in a free society government rules must be fixed and understandable. Laws may not be so complicated that they prevent average citizens from exercising basic liberties. Nor may government rules be formulated or changed by whim. All too often, laws promoting "good government" through campaign finance reform violate these very premises.

Imagine getting fired up about a controversial move by a neighboring town to annex your local neighborhood. You'd like to gather your friends to oppose the land grab and speak out about town council members who supported it. In doing so, you learn that this is no easy task. Citizens must register with the state as a political entity, fill out complicated paperwork, and report frequently about finances, operations, and more. For many, being buried neck-deep in paperwork just to speak their minds isn't worth it.

Think about the all-too-popular political raids gaining notoriety over the past few years. In early 2014, Eric O'Keefe, noted political activist, found himself embroiled in a massive anonymous "John Doe" investigation in Wisconsin. His supposed crime? Coordinating the discussion of issues about fiscal restraint between groups and public officeholders. Or consider former Speaker of the House Tom DeLay's near-decade long battle just to prove that money swaps often performed by Democrats and Republicans alike were entirely lawful when he did the same.

When campaign finance efforts use vague terms, provide prosecutors with open-ended discretion, and leave nearly all guessing what they mean, everyone suffers. Political pros and local grassroots alike need a government of laws, not of men, to secure their First Amendment rights. This is not a battle between a supposed oligarchy and average Americans for control of the Republic. It is not a battle to protect corrupt political practices. It is a battle to firmly protect robust free expression while limiting the potential for those in power to shut down dissent.

Bright line rules that limit the reach of creative bureaucrats and ambitious prosecutors preserve the First Amendment rights of everyone. Disreputable politicians will come and go and scandals will ebb and flow—all subject to citizen control at the ballot box. But campaign finance laws undo a fundamental premise of our nation by failing to protect the ability of our citizenry to robustly criticize those in power and engage in sharp public debate.