Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/13pdf/12-536_e1pf.pdf
Page Number: 57.0

6 

MCCUTCHEON v. FEDERAL ELECTION COMM’N 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

representatives, so that public opinion could be channeled 
into effective governmental action.  The Federalist No. 57, 
p. 386 (J. Cooke ed. 1961) (J. Madison); accord, T. Benton, 
1  Abridgement  of  the  Debates  of  Congress,  from  1789  to 
1856, p. 141 (1857) (explaining that the First Amendment 
will  strengthen  American  democracy  by  giving  “ ‘the  peo­
ple’ ” a right to “ ‘publicly address their representatives,’ ”
“ ‘privately advise them,’ ” or “ ‘declare their sentiments by
petition  to  the  whole  body’ ”  (quoting  James  Madison)). 
Accordingly,  the  First  Amendment  advances  not  only  the 
individual’s right to engage in political speech, but also the
public’s interest in preserving a democratic order in which
collective speech matters. 

What has this to do with corruption?  It has everything 

to do with corruption.  Corruption breaks the constitution­
ally  necessary  “chain  of  communication”  between  the 
people  and  their  representatives.    It  derails  the  essential 
speech-to-government-action  tie.  Where  enough  money 
calls the tune, the general public will not be heard.  Inso­
far  as  corruption  cuts  the  link  between  political  thought
and  political  action,  a  free  marketplace  of  political  ideas
loses  its  point.    That  is  one  reason  why  the  Court  has
stressed  the  constitutional  importance  of  Congress’  con­
cern that a few large donations not drown out the voices of 
the many.  See, e.g., Buckley, 424 U. S., at 26–27. 

That is also why the Court has used the phrase “subver­
sion  of  the  political  process”  to  describe  circumstances  in
which  “[e]lected  officials  are  influenced  to  act  contrary  to
their obligations of office by the prospect of financial gain
to themselves or infusions of money into their campaigns.” 
NCPAC,  470  U. S.,  at  497.    See  also  Federal  Election 
Comm’n v. National Right to Work Comm., 459 U. S. 197, 
208  (1982)  (the  Government’s  interests  in  preventing 
corruption “directly implicate the integrity of our electoral
process” (internal quotation marks and citation omitted)).
See  generally  R.  Post,  Citizens  Divided:  Campaign  Fi­