In the time of a history-making presidential election, history is being made not just by who the candidates are but how much their campaigns cost.
The nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics, which has been tracking money spent on federal elections since the 1980s, looked at the numbers from the Oct. 21 filing deadline and declared this the most expensive election in history.
The Washington, D.C.-based center is predicting that the cost for all federal elections will top $5.3 billion by the time the Nov. 4 general election is over, and it expects the presidential race alone to cost nearly $2.4 billion. (That's more than twice the gross domestic product of the nation of Samoa.)
It is the first time presidential candidates have collectively raised and spent more than $1 billion, and they are on track to nearly triple the amount raised in 2004 and by nearly five times that of 2000.
The center is basing its prediction on reports filed with the Federal Election Commission by all candidates for federal office, political party committees and federally focused 527 committees, those groups that can work for
Contribution recipients Iowa Legislature candidates receiving contributions from out-of-state and federal political action committees, as of Oct. 14: Top contributors As of Oct. 14, out-of-state and federal political action committees had contributed $3,814,802 to Iowa Legislature candidates. Major contributors included: Area contributions Tri-state contributions (greater than $200) reported by the major party presidential candidates through September 2008, according to The Center for Responsive Politics: Iowa Obama.........................$8,500 |
"We've marveled for years at the cost of elections, especially during presidential cycles, but this one is the first to cross the $5 billion mark," said Sheila Krumholz, the center's executive director.
"The Democrats' takeover of Congress in the 2006 election quickly shifted the fundraising advantage to their side," Krumholz said. "Money follows power."
She credits Democrats' control of Congress and their more skillful use of online fundraising, particularly in Barack Obama's presidential race. And while many new donors have entered the process this year, Krumholz said their numbers still are not representative of the electorate.
"For all their influence at the polls, guys like Joe the Plumber aren't typically campaign contributors," Krumholz said. "You're more likely to see John the Bond Trader bankrolling these campaigns."
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky, who is generally recognized as the lead opponent of campaign finance reform in Congress, has long protested that limiting contributions goes against the basic premise of democracy, in that money equates to speech and should be free to use as the donor chooses.
Voters see the result of the money chase in the constant barrage of campaign commercials, but people who look at the larger picture see indications of a far more serious and destructive impact on the democratic process.
Adam Mason, a community organizer for Voter-Owned Iowa, a campaign of Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement, in Des Moines, offers numbers of his own:
In Iowa's 2002 election, there were a total of 300 candidates for the statehouse -- 86 Senate candidates raising an average of $48,442 and 214 House candidates raising an average of $30,412.
In 2004, the number of candidates dropped to 246 -- 49 Senate candidates raising an average of $106,387 and 197 House candidates raising $30,467.
By 2006, the number of candidates was down to 208 -- 44 Senate candidates raising an average of $109,525 and 164 House candidates raising and average of $45,925.
"With each passing year, more money is raised and spent, while the number of candidates running for statehouse is dropping," Mason said.
As of Oct. 14, out-of-state and federal political action committees had contributed more than $3.8 million to Iowa state legislative candidates. At the top was the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers PAC at $152,700 and not far behind was Principal Life Insurance's PAC at $144,700.
Leaders in both parties are typically the major recipients, but money sometimes goes to chairpersons of committees that handle bills impacting the contributing PAC's interests. If a lawmaker's race is in trouble, PACs will sometimes throw a financial life line.
In the Dubuque area, the largest PAC donation of this election cycle is $48,600 going to Speaker of the House Pat Murphy, D-Dubuque. Sen. Mark Zieman, R-Postville, has received a total of $14,200, and Sen. Tom Hancock, D-Epworth, $8,050.
Mason spoke of the "cooling" effect he sees the money chase having on political involvement, with potential candidates choosing to walk away from it rather than being subjected to the overriding demands of fundraising.
The percent of voters has been on a decline, too, something Mason attributes to the avalanche of negative political advertising fueled by large contributions, as well as a feeling by voters that they have no influence to match the big campaign contributors.
"We've not found a direct link between contributions and lawmaking," Mason said. "But there is a perceived connection, and sometimes that perceived connection can be so dangerous to our democratic system. Because if there's a perceived connection, people are not going to participate in the voting process."
Mason said officeholders will say they would like to see less dependency on fundraising and the involvement by PACs, but that they are acting as responsibly as they can given the conditions. His response is that Voter Owned Iowa Clean Elections, or VOICE, gives them an opportunity to step up.
"Elected officials who say they are playing by the rules are also the ones who can change the rules so they benefit everyday folks," he said.
The solution for Mason and a growing number of like-minded Iowans is publicly financed elections in the form of Voter Owned Iowa Clean Elections.
VOICE proponents include groups like the League of Women Voters, the Iowa Renewable Energy Association, Sierra Club and Iowa Citizens Action Network. In the Legislature, Rep. Pam Jochum, D-Dubuque, has been the point person for campaign finance reform.
Currently a candidate for the state Senate, Jochum has said if she is elected she will introduce a VOICE bill in the Senate in 2009. Mason said his group received assurance from two House incumbents that they will take up the VOICE cause in their chamber.
The bill would provide funding without using tax revenue. Its principal funding source would be $10 million out of the $15 million the state treasurer annually gets from the Great Iowa Treasure Hunt involving unclaimed property. The remaining balance needed for the campaigns would come from $5 contributions candidates would be required to obtain from the prospective constituents.
As it is proposed currently, the law would require state House candidates to obtain 100 signatures from their district and 100 $5 contributions to qualify as a candidate. Senatorial candidates would need 200 signatures and 200 $5 contributions. Candidates for governor would need 500 signatures from each congressional district and 500 $5 contributions. Other statewide candidates would be required to obtain 250 signatures from each congressional district and 250 $5 contributions.
Candidates who choose to participate get an initial grant amount based on campaign costs in past election cycles. If their opponent chooses not to participate and their fundraising exceeds the grant amount, the opponent's unused grant would go to the participant. There also is a "rescue fund" the participant could tap to rebut attacks from 527s.
Connecticut is one of seven states and two cities that currently have clean election laws in place.
Karen Hobert Flynn is vice president for state operation for the national office of Common Cause, but in 2005 she was with Common Cause in Connecticut when she witnessed passage of a sweeping public finance law. The law applying to state legislative races went into effect this year. It will expand to include statewide races in 2010.
"It's going very well," Flynn said. "We have 75 percent of all the legislative candidates (who are) running taking part."
There are a record number of women running, she said, and out of 102 female candidates, 93 are running under the public finance system.
"We hope to see lots of new people participating because a lot never had access to money before," Flynn said.
Under the Connecticut system, candidates for state representative have to raise $5,000 in amounts ranging from $5 to $100 from individuals only, and 150 of the contributions have to come from within the district. Candidates for Senate must raise $15,000 in increments between $5 and $100 and 300 of the contributions must come from within their district.
"The goal here is to emphasize that anybody could give," Flynn said.
Rather than opening the door to a barrage of candidates running for office, Flynn said, the system appears to do a good job of winnowing prospective applicants. The only complaints she heard were from incumbents who said it was too much work, she chuckled.
"We have interviewed a number of candidates, and they like best that they are able to talk to voters, rather than perpetually asking for money," Flynn said. "And they like to not be beholding to large contributors."
Connecticut's campaign to get public financing began in 1997. A bill passed in 2000, only to be vetoed by Gov. John Roland, who later went to jail as part of a long history of pay-to-play scandals. Roland's successor, Gov. Jodi Rell called election reform proponents together and in December of 2005 a reform bill became law.
"The exciting thing is the Legislature did it themselves because of really unprecedented scandal," Flynn said. "It was a hard thing to do and in the end they did the right thing."
