Campaign finance reform: faulty assumptions and undemocratic consequences.
USA Today Magazine › Vol. 126 Nbr. 2632, January 1998
Linked as:
Summary
The idea of campaign finance reform is a noble one, but stems from faulty assumptions and allows the creation of an elite class. Small contributions from individuals are not likely to be enough to effectively run modern campaigns, but spending large amounts of money does not guarantee victory either.
See the full content of this document
Extract
Campaign finance reform: faulty assumptions and undemocratic consequences.
The agenda of the campaign finance I reform movement has been to lower the cost of campaigning, reduce the influence of special interests, and open up the political system to change. In 1974, reformers gained their greatest victory, passing major amendments to the Federal Elections Campaign Act. Nevertheless, by 1996, Congressional campaign spending, in constant dollars, nearly had tripled.
Congressional election contributions by political action committees (PACs) increased from $20,500,000 in 1976 to $189,000,000 in 1994. Since 1974, the number of PACs has risen from 608 to more than 4,500. House incumbents outspent challengers in 1996 by almost four to one. Meanwhile, incumbent reelection rates in the House reached record highs in 1986 and 1988, before declining slightly in the 1990s. What went wrong? The problem is that reform has been based on faulty assumptions and is, in fact, irretrievably undemocratic. Reform proposals inherently favor certain political elites. support the status quo, and discourage grassroots political ...See the full content of this document
Sponsored links
