Billionaires can buy airtime, not immunity from criticism

By Luis V. Gutierrez

To the editor:
The ghost of Citizens United haunts another election. Since the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision opened the door to unlimited independent corporate and union spending, Americans have watched campaign money become a substitute for public debate. We marvel at the totals. We should worry about their power.
 
Reuters reported that Elon Musk has spent roughly $366 million on this election cycle, including $276 million since July. That is not ordinary political participation. It is a megaphone most Americans could never afford.
 
Chicago has its own version of billionaire politics in Michael Sacks. The issue is not his identity or his right to support candidates. It is whether extraordinary wealth gives anyone extraordinary protection from criticism.
 
It was recently reported that Sacks’ attorney sent a cease-and-desist letter to Good Influence, a company financing social media videos about his political involvement. His attorney alleged false and defamatory statements. Those allegations deserve fair consideration, not automatic acceptance or dismissal. But a legal dispute over specific statements must not become a warning that a billionaire’s political activity is off limits.
 
Antisemitism is real, dangerous and deserving of unequivocal condemnation. So are stereotypes about Jewish control of politics or money. Criticism must focus on an individual’s documented conduct, not religion, ancestry or insinuations about a community.
 
That standard leaves ample room to question any donor’s spending, endorsements and influence.
 
Likewise, speaking against the killing of civilians in Gaza or calling for a cease fire does not, by itself, establish antisemitism. Serious accusations require evidence. They should never serve as shortcuts for silencing political disagreement. As Mr. Sacks reportedly did when flipping a committeeman’s vote against State Senator Villa for Illinois Comptroller. Should I call his alleged actions anti-Latina? No, if true, he weaponized a falsehood for political gain. As a former congressman, I believe democracy works best when working people can challenge powerful interests, business, labor or billionaires without needing a billionaire’s legal budget.
 
Mr. Sacks, if you enter the political arena, expect scrutiny. Defend your positions. Correct falsehoods with facts. But do not confuse accountability with persecution.
 
Our elections should reward persuasion, not purchasing power. Chicago’s children deserve a democracy in which their parents’ voices matter as much as a donor’s checkbook.
 
Luis V. Gutiérrez
Former U.S. Representative, Illinois’ 4th Congressional District

This op-ed originally appeared in the Chicago Tribune on November 1, 2026

spot_img

Video Highlight

Photo Gallery

spot_img

Latest from La Voz