Does our money matter: Wikipedia Update

As you may recall, I recently made some changes to the presidential election campaign fund checkoff  Wikipedia page on the diminishing value of personal contributions to campaigns.  Below, I am including my contribution once again for your reference:

The first crack in the public financing system began in 1999-2000, when then candidate,
George W Bush opted out of public financing in the primaries. That crack was shattered
when Barrack Obama opted out of both primary and general election public financing in
2008.

Why are these candidates opting out? Simply because there is more money to be made (and matched) by opting out. With the current limits/caps in public financing, it simply makes no sense to apply for matching funds when you can raise much, much more on their own.

In the Citizens United case, the Supreme Court allowed unions, corporations, and nonprofit organizations to spend unlimited amounts of money in support of, or opposition to a candidate. Groups were thus freed to pretty much say whatever they want, whenever they want about candidates, and to do so with unlimited sums of money bankrolling their expenditures.

Thus, if you can raise unlimited funds, why bother with public financing

Much to my disappointment, there were no additions/edits to my Wikipedia post from a few weeks ago. 

You can, however, hear this topic come up again and again as the election cycle heats up, and candidates now put out press releases detailing how much money each has respectively raised
each month and quarter.  It's almost a requirement to boast of your fund raising prowess.

Some of the lesser candidates who are not having success raising private (and public) funds are forced to watch in horror as their opponents raise millions of dollars.  In most instances, candidates will drop out due to lack of funds.

Until this issue is addressed again by the courts (or Congress), it's a dash for cash, and the general public's funds don't count for much any longer.

 

 



How much $$$$ do you need to become President?

President Obama and Mitt Romney both raised over $1 billion for their respective Presidential campaigns in 2012.  And while most of us have short memories, this fund raising was done in the midst of one of the worst economies in American History. There is no recession in political fund raising!

As noted in my opening blog, the election is still 16 months away, and we have Jeb Bush, the former Governor of Florida, who has not even officially declared his candidancy, yet has already raised north of $100 million.  This, of course, is also a tactic, to potentially scare off other candidates who don't believe they could match that fund raising prowess.  As we know, it has not scared off anyone, as the list of candidates continues to expand (was 11 last week, now up to 14).

These astronomical figures are not (presumably) from You and I cutting checks directly to the candidates.  Most of the fund raising dollars are now raised via PAC's (Political Action Committees).  The limit of how much individuals can contribute is actually $2600.00, so after some quick math, one can determine the limits of individual donations in the race to $1 billion and beyond.

So how are campaigns able to raise so much cash?  The answer lies in a 2010 Supreme Court decision centered around campaign spending.

In essence, The Supreme Court decided (5-4 vote) that corporations and PAC's have the same right of political speech (and donations) as individuals have, thus removing virtually any restriction on corporate money in politics (via PAC's, which we will cover below - please keep reading).

After the Citizens United decision, any outside group can utilize corporate money to make a direct case for who deserves your vote and why.  This has created PAC's (and super PAC's),  a species of political committee that wasn't possible before Citizens United. It can take contributions of any amount.  The heart of Citizens United is the notion that superPACs, and other outside groups, are completely independent of candidates. That underpins the Court's conclusion that unregulated money from big donors wouldn't be corrupting to lawmakers.

Every candidate, from both parties, now must play this game - raising money through PAC's, as its an arms race for cash.  Without money, campaigns would simply stop; fund raising is essential.

Some early estimates predict candidates must raise over $1.5 billion in order to win in 2016.  For some scale, Wendy's restaurants has over 6000 locations, over 30,000 employees and had just over $2 billion in sales last year?  That's a lot of burgers, but it would be just enough to run for President in the United States.