Newton knows something about local self-government. Across our villages, residents show up to debate schools, zoning, housing, development, transportation, taxes, climate policy and the future of our neighborhoods. These debates are not always easy, and they are not always quiet. But they reflect something important: people still believe their voices should matter in the decisions that shape their lives.

That belief is deeply connected to the larger Massachusetts story. From town meetings to the first shots at Lexington and Concord, our Commonwealth helped turn the radical idea that power comes from the people into a nation. The American Revolution was not simply a rejection of distant authority. It was an argument that a legitimate government depends on the consent and participation of the governed.

As the United States approaches its 250th anniversary, we have a rare opportunity to celebrate that history while also asking whether we are living up to it. The answer, unfortunately, is not as strongly as we should be. Too many Americans feel that government no longer responds to
ordinary citizens in the way it should. One major reason is the growing power of money in our elections.

Today, many campaigns are shaped by unlimited spending, outside influence, and political groups whose biggest donors are impossible for ordinary voters to identify. This is especially troubling in an era when super PACs and other outside groups can spend enormous sums to influence the outcome of elections and ballot questions. When voters believe that money speaks louder than citizens, trust in government erodes. And when trust erodes, the foundation of representative democracy weakens with it.

This should not be a partisan issue. Conservatives, liberals, moderates and independents all lose when public office becomes too dependent on wealthy donors, special interests and outside spending. Whatever our views on taxes, housing, education, immigration, climate change or foreign policy, we should be able to agree on one basic principle: our government should reflect the will of the people, not simply the preferences of those with the deepest pockets.

Massachusetts has not ignored this problem. Our state has taken steps to strengthen campaign finance disclosure, particularly around ballot questions, and has a long history of supporting reforms that protect the voice of voters. Disclosure matters. Voters deserve to know who is trying to influence their decisions. But disclosure alone is not enough. Knowing who is spending the money does not solve the deeper problem of unlimited political spending itself.

Since the 2010 Citizens United v. FEC decision, governments cannot limit independent political spending by corporations or unions, triggering a massive, multi-billion-dollar flood of money into Super Pacs. Additional court decisions have extended this trend so that, today, Super PACs are allowed to accept unlimited donations from individuals also. The Supreme Court’s recent 6-3 decision in National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) v. FEC further expands the Citizens United narrative by allowing wealthy donors to skip Super PACs and channel unlimited money directly to candidates through their political parties. That is why Congress and the states should once again have the power to set reasonable limits on money in elections. The only way to do this is through a constitutional amendment. A constitutional amendment would not silence anyone. It would not prevent citizens from speaking, organizing, volunteering, donating or advocating for the causes they believe in. Instead, it would restore the ability of the people, through their elected representatives, to create common-sense rules that protect the integrity of elections and the principle of political equality.

There is already broad support for this idea across the country. Twenty-five states, including Massachusetts, have called for a constitutional amendment restoring the ability of Congress and the states to set reasonable limits on money in elections. Groups are mobilizing and working to further promote a change in the Constitution that allows the voters, not the courts, to regulate our campaign laws. Amendments are how Americans have corrected structural problems before. We have used them to expand voting rights, abolish slavery, guarantee equal protection, and make our democracy more representative over time.

As we mark 250 years of American independence, Newton and Massachusetts should lead again. I urge my fellow residents to exercise their constitutional right to shape our democracy. I urge you to learn more about this issue, talk with our elected officials, and support a constitutional amendment that restores the ability of Congress and the states to set reasonable limits on money in our elections. A government of, by, and for the people should not be drowned out by the power of money.

Sol Nasisi
Newton Highlands

Sol Nasisi is a volunteer for American Promise, a non-profit, cross-partisan organization committed to passing the For Our Freedom Amendment to allow the states and Congress to set limits on campaign spending.