The Washington Post's reporting on Watergate led to the resignation of Richard Nixon. A lot of political pressure was put on the paper to stop its investigations into Watergate. It chose to continue with its investigations. This article reports on the aftermath of Watergate. New laws were written to make it more difficult for political parties to secretly raise campaign contributions. The Citizens United decision by the Supreme Court has overturned all of the laws that made it difficult for corporations and individuals to funnel money into politics. The message of Watergate, and the efforts to limit the corrupting influence of money in politics has been ignored. The old Washington Post would have taken a position against the corruption of the democratic process. This article takes both sides of the issue. It includes comments from individuals who support free speech and those who believe that money corrupts. The reader is left to determine whether the unlimited flow of money, that does not require the sources to be revealed, puts the democratic process at risk. Freedom of speech is opposed to the potential for corruption. We must choose between opposing free speech, which we value, over the potential for corruption which cannot be proven.
We have come a long way from Watergate and the courageous performance of The Washington Post in informing the public about the illegal behavior of our elected officials. It is less willing to take unpopular positions on important issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment