I am writing to express my disappointment with the US’s current policies on political campaigning and electioneering. Per the FEC, a total of $15,520,300 was disbursed by PACs during the 2023-2024 election cycle. This is unsettling, as it is a well-known fact that campaign funding increases candidate exposure, which drastically influences public opinion, which impacts election outcomes.

 

America is currently in a period of intense instability and distrust. Recent PEW research suggests that less than 1 in 5 of us trust the government to do what is right most of the time (15%) or all of the time (2%). This is unacceptable. In these volatile times, the stability of our nation depends on the quality of our leadership. It is essential that we establish a framework through which citizens can clearly identify candidates with a sincere heart for service, thereby electing stewards who will govern with empathy and purpose. As my representative, I hope that you agree.

 

Before considering my proposal, I urge you to revisit the Supreme Court ruling in Buckley v. Valeo, which established the precedent that political spending is synonymous with protected political speech under the First Amendment – a premise that warrants a modern challenge. Political spending is not equivalent to political speech; the dollar is not the tongue, and wealth should not be a prerequisite for the expression of ideas. On the contrary, the current scale of campaign spending serves as a prohibitive barrier to many candidates, effectively silencing diverse voices by pricing them out of the public square. We are not living in the same time period in which the Buckley vs. Valeo case took place (1976). In a political era defined by algorithmic reach and microtargeted ads, Congress has a duty to modernize our regulations. We must ensure that a candidate's viability is determined by the strength of their ideas rather than their ability to manipulate digital attention.

 

Therefore, I advocate for a comprehensive reform of U.S. political advertising policies, centered on guaranteeing equitable exposure for all candidates and modernizing the regulations that govern electioneering. Although various methods of reform are available, an integrated approach – adopting each of these measures in tandem – is essential to achieving a truly transformative impact on our electoral system:

(1)         To ensure a level playing field, candidates – including those running for presidency – should be restricted from self-funding their campaigns. Instead, election cycles should center on publicly funded forums and official digital platforms that provide all candidates with equal exposure and debate access, ensuring that merit, rather than capital, dictates electoral success.

(2)         Abolish all Political Action Committees, including PACs and Super PACs, to eliminate their disproportionate influence over our elections. These entities frequently bypass candidate-controlled messaging through independent expenditures and disingenuous issue advocacy, undermining the transparency and integrity of the electoral process.

(3)         Restrict 501(c)(4) organizations to issue advocacy and lobbying, prohibiting all independent electioneering on behalf of candidates. Current law already bars 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(6) organizations from political campaigning; there is no logical basis for exempting 'social welfare' organizations from these same standards. Given that 501(c)(3)s provide comparable social benefits without engaging in partisan politics, 501(c)(4)s should be held to the same regulatory oversight.

(4)         Restrict political party committees to coordinated campaigning and bona fide issue advocacy, effectively prohibiting independent expenditures on behalf of candidates. While parties should remain free to consult and strategize with their nominees, they should be barred from conducting autonomous, unlimited campaign operations for them.

(5)         Establish a per-election cap on independent campaigning by individuals and entities – including corporations and labor unions. While the right to political expression is fundamental, the volume of financial capital deployed for advertising should be regulated to ensure a level playing field. Since individual contributions to candidates and PACs are already capped, extending similar limits to independent campaigning is a logical and necessary step to maintain electoral integrity.

(6)         Restrict indirect campaigning conducted under the guise of issue advocacy. This could be achieved by requiring candidates, party committees, and 501(c)(4) organizations to demonstrate a three-year track record of advocacy on a specific issue before promoting it during an election cycle. Such a measure would prevent 'issue-based' advertisements from being used as a loophole to influence candidate preference.

(7)         Require 501(c)4s to disclose their donors. This is aimed at increasing transparency and combating dark money and shadow investing.

(8)         Require members of Congress to publicly document all lobbyist engagements, standardizing transparency and eliminating the 'behind-closed-doors' culture of modern lawmaking.

 

I understand that these changes are not without flaws, but I believe they are a vast improvement to our current practices and hope that you give them your full consideration.

 

I must insist that it is time for money to stop controlling our elections. The correlation between campaign funding and the capacity for media saturation is well-documented; we must recognize how this financial leverage fundamentally shapes public perception and dictates electoral outcomes. By prohibiting this activity entirely, we can give the public a chance to consider all applicants, not just the most affluent.

 

Finally, I acknowledge that most members of Congress are currently bound by an established system where campaign funding is the primary driver of success. I concede it will not be easy for you to challenge this. However, I implore you to envision a future defined by legislative independence – one where representatives are unburdened by the external pressures of PACs and Super PACs. By removing these influences, you reclaim the autonomy to serve your constituents with clarity and lead our nation with uninhibited purpose. This is the path toward a society where we can raise our children and grandchildren without fear – a society in which we can all grow old with confidence. You hold the unique power to advocate for that future.

 

While these reforms may seem ambitious, we must remember that the Constitution was designed to be a living document; amendments are a historic and necessary tool for progress. I contend that these challenges can be addressed decisively without infringing upon the fundamental right to free speech.

 

Thank you for taking the time to read this and for serving to represent me and the rest of your community. I hope you will consider introducing legislation to make this possible.