×

Q&A: Free Speech Fosters Free Elections

Q: What are the five essential freedoms of the First Amendment?

A: During the ordinary grind of everyday life, Americans may become complacent about the core principles of our democracy that guarantee our individual rights. These central freedoms set us apart from those whose homelands are ruled by authoritarian regimes, not governed “of, by and for the people.” The founders agreed upon a lasting legacy of profound consequence for those who fought and won independence and for those who would defend the natural rights of citizenship for generations yet to come. With 45 words, the First Amendment secures the sacred promises that protect freedoms of speech, religion and the press. “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.” Our laws may not dictate if or how people worship. People may picket, parade and protest peacefully. Citizens may complain and demonstrate about the government. In America, we work to bridge the divide of regional, cultural, racial and political differences because we are cemented by fundamental liberties enshrined in the First Amendment. It empowers each individual to worship, publish and petition. From revolutionary era pamphleteers to 21st century social media purveyors, the times have changed, but the First Amendment provides timeless support to a free and open society.

Q: Why is free speech especially critical during elections?

A: Although voters may grow weary of political advertising, telephone surveys and campaign mailings, Americans ought to give thanks for the constitutional protections and judicial precedents that give free speech free rein in our marketplace of ideas. This fall in the United States Senate, an effort supported by 54 lawmakers would have put free speech on the chopping block. The Senate Majority Leader proposed a constitutional amendment that would abridge the fundamental right of free speech by enabling the government to limit not just funds contributed to candidates but also to restrict spending by private individuals or groups to express political views during an election. The effort to leverage control of elections by muzzling free political speech fell short. Let’s remember the big picture. Exercising the right to vote, a hallmark of our rights and responsibilities as U.S. citizens, gives the people a direct line to self-governance. Dialing back First Amendment rights that help foster an educated citizenry is an assault on a government, “of, by and for the people.” Pro-democracy protestors, from Hong Kong to Egypt, crave free elections that some Americans seem to take for granted. Voter turnout historically drops in the U.S. midterm elections. In 2010, only 36.9 percent of the voting-age population cast a ballot. We need more participation to keep representative government robust, not less. Imagine if Americans were subject to criminal penalty for challenging government policy or knocking on their neighbor’s door to talk about politics. The First Amendment helps protect our way of life, liberty and our pursuit of happiness. Throughout the nation’s history, these basic freedoms have survived periodic threats, from the criminalization of free speech under the Alien and Sedition Acts to restricting political protests of the draft during World War I. The legal march to broaden the scope of the First Amendment gained momentum in the 20th century with key Supreme Court rulings that protected free political speech. Proposals in the 21st century that would criminalize spending by private individuals to express their point of view would close the door on decades of legal precedent and open the door for elected officials to bend the rules of democracy for self-preservation. At the same time, I support disclosure laws that strengthen the public’s right to know how much money is being spent and who the donors are to political campaigns. Accountability and transparency are critical tools to uphold good government. Some argue that the saturation of campaign advertising and polling causes some people to tune out the message instead of encouraging more people to tune in to the election. Don’t forget living in a free society also allows people to turn off the television or decline to answer the telephone when it rings. Allowing political free speech a legal platform to reach as many voters as often as possible is a small price to pay for free elections in a free society.

Q&A: Free Speech Fosters Free Elections

Q: What are the five essential freedoms of the First Amendment?

A: During the ordinary grind of everyday life, Americans may become complacent about the core principles of our democracy that guarantee our individual rights. These central freedoms set us apart from those whose homelands are ruled by authoritarian regimes, not governed “of, by and for the people.” The founders agreed upon a lasting legacy of profound consequence for those who fought and won independence and for those who would defend the natural rights of citizenship for generations yet to come. With 45 words, the First Amendment secures the sacred promises that protect freedoms of speech, religion and the press. “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.” Our laws may not dictate if or how people worship. People may picket, parade and protest peacefully. Citizens may complain and demonstrate about the government. In America, we work to bridge the divide of regional, cultural, racial and political differences because we are cemented by fundamental liberties enshrined in the First Amendment. It empowers each individual to worship, publish and petition. From revolutionary era pamphleteers to 21st century social media purveyors, the times have changed, but the First Amendment provides timeless support to a free and open society.

Q: Why is free speech especially critical during elections?

A: Although voters may grow weary of political advertising, telephone surveys and campaign mailings, Americans ought to give thanks for the constitutional protections and judicial precedents that give free speech free rein in our marketplace of ideas. This fall in the United States Senate, an effort supported by 54 lawmakers would have put free speech on the chopping block. The Senate Majority Leader proposed a constitutional amendment that would abridge the fundamental right of free speech by enabling the government to limit not just funds contributed to candidates but also to restrict spending by private individuals or groups to express political views during an election. The effort to leverage control of elections by muzzling free political speech fell short. Let’s remember the big picture. Exercising the right to vote, a hallmark of our rights and responsibilities as U.S. citizens, gives the people a direct line to self-governance. Dialing back First Amendment rights that help foster an educated citizenry is an assault on a government, “of, by and for the people.” Pro-democracy protestors, from Hong Kong to Egypt, crave free elections that some Americans seem to take for granted. Voter turnout historically drops in the U.S. midterm elections. In 2010, only 36.9 percent of the voting-age population cast a ballot. We need more participation to keep representative government robust, not less. Imagine if Americans were subject to criminal penalty for challenging government policy or knocking on their neighbor’s door to talk about politics. The First Amendment helps protect our way of life, liberty and our pursuit of happiness. Throughout the nation’s history, these basic freedoms have survived periodic threats, from the criminalization of free speech under the Alien and Sedition Acts to restricting political protests of the draft during World War I. The legal march to broaden the scope of the First Amendment gained momentum in the 20th century with key Supreme Court rulings that protected free political speech. Proposals in the 21st century that would criminalize spending by private individuals to express their point of view would close the door on decades of legal precedent and open the door for elected officials to bend the rules of democracy for self-preservation. At the same time, I support disclosure laws that strengthen the public’s right to know how much money is being spent and who the donors are to political campaigns. Accountability and transparency are critical tools to uphold good government. Some argue that the saturation of campaign advertising and polling causes some people to tune out the message instead of encouraging more people to tune in to the election. Don’t forget living in a free society also allows people to turn off the television or decline to answer the telephone when it rings. Allowing political free speech a legal platform to reach as many voters as often as possible is a small price to pay for free elections in a free society.