It was only about six weeks ago that President Clinton was lamenting the possibility that Mayor Bloomberg would spend some of his own money on a presidential run. “We are very frustrated because we have a Supreme Court that seems determined to say that the wealthier have more right to free speech than the rest of us,” Mr. Clinton said in Iowa, according to Politico, complaining that such spending violates “the spirit of campaign finance reform.”

What a difference a few weeks makes. Yesterday came the disclosure that Senator Clinton had loaned her own presidential campaign $5 million of her own funds, the spirit of campaign finance reform be darned. Given that Senator Obama’s entire net worth is far below $5 million, Mrs. Clinton’s loan proves Mr. Clinton’s point.

In our December 26 editorial on Mr. Clinton’s remarks, “Clinton and Cash,” we noted that “Democrats, it seems, can spend their own money on political speech without a whole lot of fretting from Bill Clinton. It’s only when someone threatening to run against his wife as an independent starts thinking about it that Mr. Clinton gets worked up.”

If Mrs. Clinton’s own husband won’t attack his wife’s likely presidential opponent, Senator McCain, for trying to restrict campaign speech, if Mr. Clinton won’t defend the First Amendment principles on which the Supreme Court has provided the basis for his wife’s campaign to underwrite itself — well, these columns will.

It doesn’t bother us in the least that Mrs. Clinton is underwriting her own campaign. More political speech is better, whether it comes from Mrs. Clinton or Mr. Bloomberg. The nation is better served by a prolonged debate between the Democratic contenders than by one artificially cut short by campaign contribution limits set by a law whose spirit, so precious to President Clinton, runs counter to our nation’s interests and ideals.