Campaign Finance Reform and Donald Trump...


The democracy that Abraham Lincoln envisaged as “of the people, for the people and by the people”, was one that not only guaranteed that every citizen has the right to vote but also ensured that every citizen has the right to contest for elections. The former has largely been achieved, almost every citizen has a right to vote, but what about contesting for elections? Can anybody with a desire for public service contest for elections? In theory they can, all the individual would have to is follow certain mandatory processes and register as a candidate, this would ensure that the name appears on the ballot. But that is merely the first step. To influence a whole myriad of potential voters, a campaign has to be mounted with a wide and deep reach. This is an expensive affair, an impossible proposition for the average individual with limited resources. So does one seek funds and what impacts does it have if the candidate gets elected? Also, can any candidate in contemporary political expect to win without such a campaign?

Before we attempt to provide answers to all those questions, let’s we back, all the way to 1755, where George Washington was trounced in his first election. His defeat taught him that he needed to improve his ‘influence’ over the voter. Hence, two years later, when he contested for elections again, an innovative approach was followed where prospective voters treated to a lavish buffet near the polling booth. The ploy worked and Washington was elected to the Virginia House of Burgesses.  However, the then elected legislature realized that it was an unfair practice and would present an unfair advantage to wealthy candidates such as Washington. They therefore promptly passed a law that prevented a candidate or persons on the candidate from offering prospective voters any sort of inducements to secure their votes. Over the years, various governments did all they could to regulate the campaign finance such as a naval appropriations bill in 1867 and The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act in 1883. In 1907, President Theodore Roosevelt passed several tough laws that made it illegal for corporations to contribute financially to politician, or political committee or for any political purpose. Roosevelt understood the dangers of giving unlimited control to powerful nonpublic entities. He wanted the real power to elect a candidate to only be in the hands of the voting public and nobody else. Over a century after Roosevelt efforts to reform campaign finance, in 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that independent political expenditures by unions NGOs, and corporations are protected under the First Amendment and are not subject to restriction by the government. Thus making it legal not only for candidates to receive huge monies but also without the compulsion of making a disclosure. The commitments made to regulate campaign finance thus melted into thin air

To be fair, the nature of campaigns have changed drastically since Roosevelt’s time. It is not just conducting town hall meets and visiting prospective voters at their homes. Modern campaigns are like running a business, there are huge expenses involved to pay salaries, to run adverts on TV, to manage a social media campaign, to book venues, to conduct polls and to run campaign office from multiple locations. For a Presidential campaign the cost could go as high as half a billion dollars. To understand how high the stakes are, it is said that Obama and Romney spent a total of 1.7 billion dollars for their campaigns. Even senate election campaigns has an expenditure over 100 million dollars.
So how does a candidate acquire these sort of funds for his campaign? There are two options the first is a large number of small donations or a small number of large donations. The former is clearly the more honorable option, but often takes time and relies largely on recognition of the candidate. For new candidates with no name recognition it is an impossible proposition. Hence the second option has to be chosen. But there are consequences.

Let consider a fictitious scenario, where a Clean Air bill up for a vote in the Senate. One of the clauses in this bill states that companies that pollute the environment will be levied with hefty fines. Clean air is a basic necessity and even a right that every individual has. Hence voting ‘Yes’ to this bill the moral thing to do, in colloquially parlance it is a ‘no brainer’. Enter junior Senator John, five companies located in his state are responsible for polluting the air with harmful gases and each will be fined over millions of dollars if the Clean Air bill is passed. But matters get complicated, the proprietors of these very companies had donated a handsome twenty million dollars each to Senator John’s campaign a few years ago, they have promised identical amounts for his next campaign, to be launched in six months.  Senator John therefore votes against the Clean Air bill, thus failing to protect his voters from a basic right. The companies pay his campaign money and he wins the next election. Let’s assume a scenario where Senator John developed a conscience and voted for the Clean Air bill. The companies responsible for pollution are not too pleased at the prospect of paying millions of dollars as fines. They decide to punish Senator John by paying their twenty million to a rival candidate Tim. Without a well-funded campaign Senator John finds himself to be a considerably weaker, while candidate Tim with his well-funded machinery manages to launch vicious attack adverts on Senator John. Candidate Tim also manages to secure interviews on every local station after treating them to lavish presents with a promise that they will spread lies and not give Senator John any air time. In the end Senator John is voted out of office and candidate Tim is victorious. Upon entering office, Senator Tim votes against the Clean Air bill, thus keeping his masters happy. In a year Tim does such a fine job in voting for the interest of the companies that they invite him to their annual gathering to deliver a lecture, where his words of wisdom earn him a hundred of thousands of dollars. Quite a turnaround for Senator Tim who was once a humble lawyer at a district court. Upon retirement Senator Tim continues delivers speeches for which he is paid and average sum of 200, 000 dollars. In the same state, for the past three decades, is a well-meaning candidate Bernard Paul, a doctor by profession. He would have served the people honestly, but alas Dr. Bernard doesn’t have the resources to run a campaign resulting in him polling rather poorly. Rival candidates and the local news media have successfully painted Dr. Bernard to be a loon. Thus the best man for the job simply has no chance as he is unwilling to strike deal with donors.

The moral of that story is that voting public have an illusion of choice, but no matter whom they chose the string of these puppets are pulled by the same masters. If the puppet refuses to dance, he or she is summarily replaced. An exclusive closed club has been established and it comprises of politicians and special interests. The special interests fund campaigns and the politician gets things done for the special interests. It is important for the politician that the monies keep coming in and it is equally important for the special interest to maintain the influence over the politician. This is a disease that runs equally deep in both parties. Not every politician is part of this club, but it is fair to state that all the politicians who matter are part of this club. The news media is also a powerful arm of this club and if anybody threatens to challenge the club, he is hunted out of town by the media hounds. The exclusive club has been a mandatory stepping stone for anybody who wants to be anybody in politics i.e. most career politicians. 

The only way the establishment could be challenged was if a candidate with great recognition, a proven track record and the ability to finance his own campaign was to enter the race. On June 16, 2015, a man fitting this description brought that hope into reality, the man is Donald J. Trump. He has made the unholy alliance between big donors and politicians one of the main issues of his campaign.



But the club that has been standing for decades now was not going to give up so easily. As expected the attacks have been relentless, from the media with falsehoods, mischaracterizations, and ridicule. When that didn’t work terms such as ‘racist’, ‘sexist’, ‘xenophobe’, ‘hateful’ ‘unstable’ were thrown into the mix. There were attack adverts by members of his own party, targeting Trump by political opponents and PACs the price tag of which runs into hundreds of millions of dollars. There was the #NeverTrump movement again by ‘conservatives’. Left wing groups attacked Trump supporters and shut down his rallies. The media and his opponents jumped in blaming Trump instead of the perpetrators.  Finally fear tactics were employed, where ‘experts’ asserted that Trump would never get to the magic number of 1237 and that there would be a contested convention where there would be violence that would destroy the GOP forever. They predicted that it would result in the party being deeply divided and Hillary would win by a huge margin. It has to be noted that these were the very people who had predicted that Trump would never ever be a factor in the primaries.
These vicious attacks have had a devastating effect on the campaign, Donald Trump has secured the most primary votes in the history of GOP. Trump has won all of the past seven races with more than 50% of the votes. Trump is now the presumptive nominee of the party, securing the nomination much earlier than any of the detractors had predicted. All this by spending the least amount of money, not taking any money from big donors, no TV ads, and speaking his mind.  As he likes to assert, he is ahead of schedule and under the budget.

In conclusion, it is clear that special interest monies has hijacked US politics to the point that the power of the voter has been rendered irrelevant. What good is the right to vote when every major candidate on the ballot is less intrested in serving their constituents and more focused on reciprocity deals with their special interests. For this unholy alliance to be broken an uprising was required and it had to be from the grassroot level. In making Trump the GOP nominee, the common folk taken the first major step that commenses a long journey to re-establish a democracy in their country that is truly of the people, for the people and by the people.

Comments