FreewriteFreewriteWhy is money necessary to political Why is money necessary to political campaigns? Why is money in campaigns? Why is money in campaigns problematic for campaigns problematic for representative democracy? representative democracy?

Can we restrict money in politics to Can we restrict money in politics to create an equitable electoral process? create an equitable electoral process? Should we? In what ways should we Should we? In what ways should we restrict it? restrict it?

CAMPAIGNS: SEASON, CAMPAIGNS: SEASON, MONEY, MEDIAMONEY, MEDIA

EARLY HISTORICAL EARLY HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDBACKGROUND First 50 years-First 50 years-

costs are low--costs are low--small pop., only small pop., only white male white male property owners property owners could vote: 1 out could vote: 1 out of 5 adultsof 5 adults

cheap election cheap election costscosts

The history involves 3 issues: •public disclosure of funds•restrictions on contributions•public financing of Presidential campaigns

The history involves 6players:•parties, media, interest groups, PACS , FEC, Courts, Congress

The history involves 1 big question:Is money protected by the First Amendment?

The Growth of The Growth of “Boodle”“Boodle” 19th century changes19th century changes

– expansion of rights and expansion of rights and enfranchisementenfranchisement

– industrializationindustrialization– big interest groups emerge: industry, big interest groups emerge: industry,

laborlabor– Democratic reforms increase Democratic reforms increase

pressure: 17th, 19th Amendmentspressure: 17th, 19th Amendments– hyperpluralismhyperpluralism

Attempts at ReformAttempts at ReformBefore 20th Before 20th CenturyCentury

– focus on political focus on political participationparticipation

In the 20th In the 20th CenturyCenturyefforts focus on the efforts focus on the campaign process campaign process itselfitself

Zig Zag path of ReformZig Zag path of Reform

1905: Teddy Roosevelt “1905: Teddy Roosevelt “all all contributions by corporations to any political contributions by corporations to any political committee or for any political purpose should committee or for any political purpose should be forbidden by law.”be forbidden by law.”

1907--Tillman Act, 1910 and 1925 1907--Tillman Act, 1910 and 1925 Federal Corrupt Practices Acts:Federal Corrupt Practices Acts: set set spending limits for House/Senate Campaigns spending limits for House/Senate Campaigns and disclosure laws ALL: weak enforcement!and disclosure laws ALL: weak enforcement!

Zig Zag path of ReformZig Zag path of Reform 1944: AFL-CIO 1944: AFL-CIO form first PAC, or Political Action form first PAC, or Political Action

CommitteeCommittee

Congress:Congress:– 1971 FECA: 1971 FECA: repeals FCPA and creates updated repeals FCPA and creates updated

framework for regulation of campaign financing--$, framework for regulation of campaign financing--$, advertising, disclosureadvertising, disclosure

– 1974 Amendment: 1974 Amendment: abolishes limits on media abolishes limits on media advertising and advertising and establishes the FECestablishes the FEC

Courts:Courts: 1976: Buckley v. Valeo: keeps FEC, 1976: Buckley v. Valeo: keeps FEC, disclosure laws, but strikes down as unconstitutional disclosure laws, but strikes down as unconstitutional limits on candidate spending on their own campaignlimits on candidate spending on their own campaign

BuckleyBuckley on spending on spending limitslimits Can’t limit Independent Expenditures Can’t limit Independent Expenditures

– ““The concept that government may restrict the speech of The concept that government may restrict the speech of some elements of our society in order to enhance the some elements of our society in order to enhance the relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First relative voice of others is wholly foreign to the First Amendment.”Amendment.”

Can’t limit Candidate Personal expendituresCan’t limit Candidate Personal expenditures – ““The candidate, no less than any other person, has a First The candidate, no less than any other person, has a First

Amendment right to engage in the discussion of public Amendment right to engage in the discussion of public issues and vigorously and tirelessly to advocate his own issues and vigorously and tirelessly to advocate his own election and the election of other candidates.”election and the election of other candidates.”

Can’t limit Overall Campaign expenditures Can’t limit Overall Campaign expenditures – ““The major evil associated with rapidly increasing The major evil associated with rapidly increasing

campaign expenditures is the danger of candidate campaign expenditures is the danger of candidate dependence on large contributions. The interest in dependence on large contributions. The interest in alleviating the corrupting influence of large contributions is alleviating the corrupting influence of large contributions is served by the act’s contribution limitations and disclosure served by the act’s contribution limitations and disclosure provisions rather than by campaign expenditure ceilings.”provisions rather than by campaign expenditure ceilings.”

Buckley and TV adsBuckley and TV ads

Buckley, among other things, established the Buckley, among other things, established the difference between:difference between:– express advocacy ads:express advocacy ads: ads that show ads that show

“electioneering” language, and directly “electioneering” language, and directly communicate a message to support or reject a communicate a message to support or reject a candidate: used by political parties, etc.candidate: used by political parties, etc.

– ““Magic Words” testMagic Words” test– express adsexpress ads-subject to federal regulation-subject to federal regulation– issue advocacy ads:issue advocacy ads: ads that neither directly ads that neither directly

promote or reject candidates: used by 501 groups, promote or reject candidates: used by 501 groups, etc.etc.

– issue ads:issue ads: not subject to federal regulations not subject to federal regulations

Buckley v. ValeoBuckley v. Valeo

Upholds disclosure requirements Upholds disclosure requirements

Strikes down spending limits because they Strikes down spending limits because they interfere with first amendment freedoms interfere with first amendment freedoms

Upholds contribution limits Upholds contribution limits

Upholds presidential public financing Upholds presidential public financing because expenditure limits are voluntarybecause expenditure limits are voluntary

The Soft Money DanceThe Soft Money Dance

1979: Carter: 1979: Carter: signs law to allow unlimited signs law to allow unlimited soft money contributions for “party-building soft money contributions for “party-building activities”activities”

1991: FEC 1991: FEC requires parties to disclose soft requires parties to disclose soft money contributionsmoney contributions

Congress: 1996: McCain-Feingold--Congress: 1996: McCain-Feingold--ban PACs and offer financial incentives, later--ban PACs and offer financial incentives, later--limit soft moneylimit soft money

Bipartisan Campaign Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act of Finance Reform Act of 2002 (BCRA)2002 (BCRA)

Bans national party soft moneyBans national party soft money Limits state party soft moneyLimits state party soft money Raises hard money limitsRaises hard money limits Millionaire amendmentMillionaire amendment Ad limitsAd limits

Hard Money limits Hard Money limits under BCRAunder BCRA Individuals: Individuals:

– Can give $2,000 per candidate per Can give $2,000 per candidate per campaigncampaign

– Can give $25,000 to a party, per yearCan give $25,000 to a party, per year– Can give a maximum of $95,000 to Can give a maximum of $95,000 to

candidates, parties, and PACscandidates, parties, and PACs PACs:PACs:

– Still can give $5,000 to each candidateStill can give $5,000 to each candidate– Still can give $15,000 to each partyStill can give $15,000 to each party– No limit on overall contributionsNo limit on overall contributions

How does money How does money influence today’s influence today’s elections?elections? BCRA 2002: $2,000 individual cap BCRA 2002: $2,000 individual cap

(matchable); $5,000 PAC Cap(matchable); $5,000 PAC Cap– Ergo: get as many individual donors as Ergo: get as many individual donors as

possiblepossible– Ergo: the little guy can still matterErgo: the little guy can still matter– Ergo: internet serves as a great interface Ergo: internet serves as a great interface

between the party organization and the voterbetween the party organization and the voter

Controversy: is a campaign donation Controversy: is a campaign donation considered an “act of speech” --speech considered an “act of speech” --speech plus?plus?

Bush AdministrationBush Administration

•2000 election: both parties raise up to $500 million•2002 Bush signs legislation:

bans national party committees and federal office holders from soliciting soft money

•May 20033 judge Fed. Court struck down most of the ban

Top Ten Democratic 527s Top Ten Democratic 527s in 2004in 2004

America Coming Together - NonFederal Account 79,795,487

Joint Victory Campaign 2004 71,811,666

The Media Fund 59,404,183

Service Employees International Union Political Education & Action Fund 48,426,867

AFSCME Special Account 25,144,915

MoveOn.org Voter Fund 12,558,215

New Democrat Network Non Federal Account 12,726,158

Citizens for a Strong Senate 10,853,730

Sierra Club Voter Education Fund 87,271,27

EMILYS List Non Federal 77,399,46

Top Ten Republican 527s, Top Ten Republican 527s, 20042004Progress for America Voter Fund 44,929,178

Swift Boat Vets and POWs for Truth 25,758,413

Club for Growth 19,365,903

College Republican National Committee, Inc. 16,830,651

Club for Growth.net 4,115,037

National Association of Realtors 527 Fund 3,215,263

The November Fund 3,151,170

CA Republican National Convention Delegation 2004 Account 4,393,055

Republican Leadership Coalition, Inc. 2,365,550

National Federation of Republican Women 2,201,533

““Working Together”Working Together”

Federal Candidate Federal Candidate Committee Committee (FEC) – e.g, (FEC) – e.g, Jones for President Campaign Jones for President Campaign CommitteeCommittee

National Party National Party (FEC)(FEC) – – Democratic National CommitteeDemocratic National Committee

State Parties State Parties (FEC & State (FEC & State Election Comm)Election Comm) – – Democratic Democratic Party of Virginia Party of Virginia

Local Parties Local Parties (FEC & State (FEC & State Election Comm)Election Comm)

PACsPACs– Connected PACsConnected PACs– Unconnected PACSUnconnected PACS– SuperPacsSuperPacs

Individual contributorsIndividual contributors 527s527s

Connected PACsConnected PACs n the 2008 elections, the top nine PACs by n the 2008 elections, the top nine PACs by

money spent by themselves, their affiliates money spent by themselves, their affiliates and subsidiaries were as follows:and subsidiaries were as follows:

International Brotherhood of Electrical International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers PAC $3,344,650Workers PAC $3,344,650

AT&T Federal PAC $3,108,200AT&T Federal PAC $3,108,200 American Bankers Association (BANK PAC) American Bankers Association (BANK PAC)

$2,918,140$2,918,140 National Beer Wholesalers Association PAC National Beer Wholesalers Association PAC

$2,869,000$2,869,000 Dealers Election Action Committee of the Dealers Election Action Committee of the

National Automobile Dealers Association National Automobile Dealers Association $2,860,000$2,860,000

International Association of Fire Fighters International Association of Fire Fighters $2,734,900$2,734,900

International Union of Operating Engineers International Union of Operating Engineers PAC $2,704,067PAC $2,704,067

American Association for Justice PAC American Association for Justice PAC $2,700,500$2,700,500

Laborers' International Union of North Laborers' International Union of North America PAC $2,555,350America PAC $2,555,350

McConnell v. FECMcConnell v. FEC

Upholds soft money ban. The governmental Upholds soft money ban. The governmental interest underlying §323(a).preventinginterest underlying §323(a).preventing– ““The actual or apparent corruption of federal The actual or apparent corruption of federal

candidates and officeholders constitutes a sufficiently candidates and officeholders constitutes a sufficiently important interest to justify contribution limits. …The important interest to justify contribution limits. …The idea that large contributions to a national party can idea that large contributions to a national party can corrupt or create the appearance of corruption of corrupt or create the appearance of corruption of federal candidates and officeholders is neither novel federal candidates and officeholders is neither novel nor implausible.”nor implausible.”

Upholds hard money restrictions on issue ads. Upholds hard money restrictions on issue ads. – ““Although the . . . advertisements do not urge the Although the . . . advertisements do not urge the

viewer to vote for or against a candidate in so many viewer to vote for or against a candidate in so many words, they are no less clearly intended to influence words, they are no less clearly intended to influence the election."the election."

Supreme CourtSupreme Court

June 2003 5-4 ruling!June 2003 5-4 ruling!– McConnell v. FECMcConnell v. FEC– ““coordinated expenditures” to coordinated expenditures” to

campaigns subject to FEC limitscampaigns subject to FEC limits– BUT: soft money spent by parties BUT: soft money spent by parties

independent of candidate campaigns independent of candidate campaigns is o.k.is o.k.

– minority: Kennedy, Rehnquist, Scalia, minority: Kennedy, Rehnquist, Scalia, ThomasThomas

Citizens United vs. FECCitizens United vs. FEC

Overrules Overrules McConnellMcConnell in part: in part:– Overrules the ban on independent expenditures Overrules the ban on independent expenditures

paid for by corporations or unions out of their paid for by corporations or unions out of their treasuries 60 days before an electiontreasuries 60 days before an election

Overturns ban on independent expenditures Overturns ban on independent expenditures from corporate and union treasuriesfrom corporate and union treasuries– "If the First Amendment has any force, it "If the First Amendment has any force, it

prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, prohibits Congress from fining or jailing citizens, or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in or associations of citizens, for simply engaging in political speech," - Justice Kennedy political speech," - Justice Kennedy

Effects of PolispotsEffects of Polispots

Perceptions of candidates can be Perceptions of candidates can be changedchanged

Costs of campaigning skyrocketCosts of campaigning skyrocket Traditional parties are weakened; Traditional parties are weakened;

money wins outmoney wins out Voter cynicismVoter cynicism The Iron Law: Politicians The Iron Law: Politicians mustmust be be

able to handle the mediaable to handle the media

Campaign AdsCampaign Ads

The goal: reinforce, activate, and convert The goal: reinforce, activate, and convert votersvoters

Polispots and their stages: miss one stage, Polispots and their stages: miss one stage, you lose the election!you lose the election!Stage 1: Identification—Who am I? Stage 1: Identification—Who am I? (background and qualifications)(background and qualifications)Stage 2: Arguments-What is my position? Stage 2: Arguments-What is my position? (position on different issues)(position on different issues)Stage 3: Attack—What’s wrong with my Stage 3: Attack—What’s wrong with my opponent?opponent?Stage 4: Future “ I see an America…” Stage 4: Future “ I see an America…” (visionary, hopeful)(visionary, hopeful)

Heading off the Attack Heading off the Attack AdAd Late defenseLate defense

InoculationInoculation

Some examplesSome examples

1988 Election: Willie Horton Ad: 1988 Election: Willie Horton Ad: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC9j6Wfdq3ohttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EC9j6Wfdq3o2000 Election: Ralph Nader Ad2000 Election: Ralph Nader Adhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH4VCtAQcP4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tH4VCtAQcP4

2004 Election: Kerry Windsurfing Ad2004 Election: Kerry Windsurfing Adhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbdzMLk9wHQhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pbdzMLk9wHQ2004 Election: Bush Cheney2004 Election: Bush Cheneyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iPnvACXXV0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2iPnvACXXV01980 Election: Ronald Reagan1980 Election: Ronald Reaganhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU-IBF8nwSYhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EU-IBF8nwSY2008 Election: Mitt Romney2008 Election: Mitt Romneyhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2HsaCqLzA0http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X2HsaCqLzA02000 Election AD: George Bush2000 Election AD: George Bushhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vULB2jtmlywhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vULB2jtmlyw2006: Bill Richardson2006: Bill Richardsonhttp: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0juSJ-y9xghttp: //www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0juSJ-y9xgBarack ObamaBarack Obamahttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DLNsFjFGCIhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DLNsFjFGCI