Candidates and "Spam"

I get a lot of political email. I've been invited to fundraisers for candidates from the far right to the far left, in spaces from lavish ballrooms to modest living rooms. I get invited by close friends and people I've never met. Most email asks for money, but some simply updates me on a candidate's news and views.

I don't think any of it is "spam".

But some people need something to complain about, and, this political season, it's been "spam". A commenter here responded to my endorsements by asking one of the candidate's "policy on sending unsolicited bulk e-mail to promote a campaign". In a nutshell, I don't know and I don't care.

Political speech needs to be free speech. Indeed, our federal laws regulating email recognize that political email is different from commercial "spam", and is entirely legal. Any alternative would be equivalent to our founding fathers passing a law banning pamphleteers.

Campaigns are fairly short-term enterprises. They rely on quickly and efficiently creating networks of like-minded individuals. In prior generations, this process was slow and expensive, relying on snail mail and traditional political clubs. Today, candidates can build email lists from prior campaigns and membership organizations, and create a viable campaign without selling their souls to major donors or third party committees.

The way I see it, each email I receive from a candidate, solicited or not, is evidence of democracy struggling to free itself from the corrupting influence of big money.

Now, I realize that some people need something to whine about, and I'd even agree with those people that candidates ought to be judicious in their use of email to avoid becoming email nuisances. The delete key, however, ought to be a sufficient tool for those who value the purity of their inbox more than freedom of political speech.