How the Internet could democratize campaign spending

[Commentary] The prospect of billions of dollars moving opaquely through the Internet and aimed at influencing our votes can sound ominous, especially as the Web is increasingly a tool that Americans use to communicate both personally and politically. In the broadest sense, allowing this flood of ad money feels contrary to our usual efforts to ensure that we know who is spending large sums to try to influence the makeup and actions of our government. But the world of campaign finance regulation has always been fuzzy and complex, especially as we try to balance the values of fairness and transparency with the equally fundamental principle of freedom of expression.

These new advertising tools, from e-mail and websites to Facebook and YouTube and more, clearly offer both opportunities and challenges in an already fraught landscape. The legal framework that defines when political spending should be disclosed — and perhaps even restricted — have centered on the subject of the message and the scope of the spending. Messages that advocate directly for or against federal candidates, and the use of significant amounts of money to present those messages, have been triggers for disclosure and sometimes limits. But these rules were developed in a communications environment where my spending on a 30-second TV or radio ad prevented you from using that same time; a big imbalance in spending could mean some messages were everywhere while others remained unheard. The Internet might be different. My use doesn’t obviously limit yours, and the cost of participating is a lot lower than the cost of broadcast ads.

[Bob Biersack is a senior fellow at the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research group tracking money in U.S. politics.]