Money and Political Power
In last month's column Purple listed eight problem areas facing America which require government action to resolve. Of course "government action" means action by elected officials, and the ability of any official to act in the public interest is constrained by the commitments, the "baggage," he or she carries when taking office. Let's start with elections. That's where "government action" begins.
Getting elected in America takes money – scads of money. Willie Sutton robbed banks because "that's where the money is." Current law, underwritten by the Supreme Court's Citizens United decision, allows contributions to so-called Super Pacs in unlimited amounts by individuals and corporations who can under present law remain anonymous. So candidates follow Willie's advice - they accept SuperPac support, and look to wealthy individuals and businesses for campaign funds. In return the donor expects support for his particular special interests or ideological beliefs. So the official comes to office beholden to his or her financial backers, not to the voters at large.
It seems to be true that a lie, repeated often enough, becomes fact to many listeners. Television, say Fox News, reaches many listeners. There is no check on the accuracy of the political messages it is paid to carry. And television is expensive. So lots of political money raised is spent sending televised messages, usually negative and frequently distorted or untrue, to vilify the candidate the message senders oppose.
What is the result? Constructive ideas are driven out of the political debate. Animosities between politicians and parties are intensified. Elections are decided by money. Elected officials become beholden to their moneyed supporters. Policies, if any can be enacted by a bitterly divided legislature, tend to favor special interests rather than the general welfare. Hard problems are filibustered or ignored. Government descends into angry gridlock. Our democratic system of government fails its citizens. Sadly, that is where we are now, and the tone of this current campaign threatens to drive America politics further into the swamp.
What can be done?
First, citizens need to recognize the danger. If you are unconvinced there is danger, read "It's Even Worse Than It Looks," by Mann and Ornstein, two respected political scholars, one from a liberal "think tank" and the other from a conservative one. They will convince you that system is broken, and money is a major cause. Quoting them: "In a city where much of the business is about divvying up over $3 billion in federal spending and carving out tax breaks from over $2 trillion in revenues, the money spent influencing those [political] decisions has mushroomed …"
Second, get rid of anonymity. Citizens United did not insist on it; Republicans blocked a bill that would have required disclosing the names of large donors.
How to get rid of big money in politics? Reversal of the Citizens United decision would be a start. The watchdog organization Global Integrity states that in Citizens United "The United States has taken a step backwards in its struggle to control the corrupting influence of money in politics." Chief Justice Roberts' break with his conservative colleagues over health care suggests that the Court might yet be an ally in forestalling the sale of our government to the highest bidder.
Finally, voters should react adversely to anonymous negative messages, and support the targets of those attacks. In Virginia's US Senate race, out-of-state money favors one party's candidate the over the other by a 18:1 ratio. Who is behind that? Virginia's Senate election should be decided by Virginians, not by outside money.
Ultimately, we must greatly reduce the influence of private money in elections. Candidates spend far too much time raising money, and elections are hugely expensive. Those who finance them demand favors, corrupting the democratic process.
But politicians are unlikely to bite the hand that feeds them until we voters insist. The time to start working on that process is now. The day to insist on it is the first Tuesday in November.