If anyone needed a more clear illustration of how the regulation of free speech — sometimes called “campaign finance law” — has gotten out of control, he or she need look no further than a report yesterday by the Associated Press. It says that Senator Kerry has determined that it would be illegal for him to tap his ketchup-heiress wife’s vast fortune to aid his presidential campaign. “Teresa Heinz Kerry’s holdings have been estimated at $550 million or more, putting her among the 400 richest Americans on Forbes magazine’s list last year,” the AP reports. Mr. Kerry could use some of that cash to compete with President Bush, who is expected to raise $200 million or more for his reelection bid.

Ms. Heinz Kerry, it seems, is limited to the same $2,000 donation as anyone else, now that Mr. Kerry is in the race. If she had given her husband loads of money, or made her bank accounts joint, years ago, there would be more flexibility. But any gifts now will constitute — God forbid! — an attempt to influence a federal election. The only way that seems plausible for Ms. Heinz Kerry to spend money on the campaign is to respond on her own behalf if one of the other candidates attacks her personally. It’s unlikely anyone will mention the mis sus under those circumstances.

Still, the forces of speech regulation march on, undeterred. In New York, there is now an effort at Albany to require lobbyists on state contracts to register with the government. This is already required for those who lobby on legislation and regulation. This is a flat-out infringment on the First Amendment right “to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Imagine the outrage were the state to require those who wish to exercise other First Amendment rights — like say, that of the press, or of the free exercise of religion — to register at Albany. The proposed lobbying regulations would even interfere with the right of contract, stipulating that lobbyists on state contracts not be able to work on contingency — in other words, that they not be held responsible for results.

And in New York City, the Campaign Finance Board is proposing that wealthy candidates — such as Mayor Bloomberg — limit themselves to spending $5.7 million, and in return see their opponents’ matching funds cut back. Mr. Bloomberg spent $70 million in the last election. We doubt he’ll see the benefit of the proposed new scheme. But if he does, well, remember what they say about a fool and his money.