OCR Text |
Show Hinckley Journal of Politics Autumn 1998 Money, Politics and Campaign Reform by Kelly Burton In this article, Kelly Burton explores the status of campaign finance in recent federal elections. Early in America's youth, political candidates "stood" for office rather than "ran" for office. It was considered uncouth to aggressively campaign. As the years passed, the desirability of political office grew, and modest campaign finance guidelines were implemented. Despite these efforts, campaign spending is out of control; recently an average senate race cost $3.7 million, with Al D'Amato of New York spending $11.5 million. Limitless spending can be attributed to a Supreme Court decision in Buckley v. Valeo, J 976. In this case, the Supreme Court ruled that any limit on campaign spending violated the first amendment. Thus, political parties fund'raise relentlessly, offering incentives such as contact with top government officials. A possible solution to campaign finance abuses is explored with a discussion of the McCain-Feingold Bill. Introduction Those familiar with the world of politics are aware of remarks such as this one attributed to Mark Hanna: "'There are two things that are important in politics. The first one is money, and I can't remember what the second one is'" (quoted in Christian 1996, 125). Money is sometime called the mother's milk of politics." These statements, and others like them seem to be consistent with the perceptions that politics and money are inseparably intertwined. Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post declared: "It is money which, arguably, determines the very basics of our democracy: Who runs, who wins, and how they govern" (1997). Charles Lewis, founder and Executive Director of the Center for Public Integrity, insists that "the garishness of money in politics has reached new levels of audacity," and refers to the presidential campaign in the United States as "a giant auction, in which multimillion-dollar interests compete to influence and gain access to the candidates who would be president" (1996b). But Lewis isn't finished there. He adds, "Alliances between political candidates and their financial patrons are not uniquely American. Compromising relationships are endemic to politics generally." He continues, "not only does the country understand it, but for generations we all have come to expect it" (7). The late Philip Stern, a harsh critic of campaign finance, described U.S. legislators as '"the best Congress money can buy'" (quoted in Lewis, 11). Although some would argue that these statements do not reflect the reality of the system, few would argue that money does not play a major role. Kelly Burton received a B.S. in Political Science, completing this paper as part of an independent research project. She is currently raising a family in Portland, OR. Money and Politics: A Necessary Evil? As with any important issue, there are opposing opinions. Not all believe that money in politics is "an evil that must be tolerated." Many believe that the cost is proportional to the service provided. Political scientist David Adamany stresses that "'By most measures Americans pay a small cost for the maintenance of an adversary political process in a complicated federal system'" (quoted in Palda 1994, 4). Former Senator Robert Packwood would agree. Addressing the question of whether elections are too expensive, he declared: "The United States does not spend anywhere near what other democratic countries do in their elections. We do not come near to spending what we do in this country on ... advertising for pet food. So, in terms of priorities and importance, let us not get things out of scale. I would like to think that the value of an election for Congress or the Senate is worth as much as a can of cat food or dog food" (quoted in Palda, 7). XG Influence Ask the private citizen, and he would express concern about the influence of money in politics. According to a poll conducted by Public Opinion Strategies, as reported by Senator John McCain (R-AZ), when asked who they believed to control the Federal Government in Washington, 49 percent of registered voters indicated the lobbyists and interest groups. Additionally, 64 percent of respondents worried that those who make large campaign contributions get special "favors" from politicians. Finally, 59 percent of respondents believe that campaign finance reform is needed "in order to make politicians accountable to the average voter" (McCain, 1996). The important question when one is considering the high prices of campaigning is just how much influence all campaign donations buy. Some believe that in the current system of campaign finance, access and attention, as well as policy, 21 |