The many ways Big Money ruins local politics
Cover of The Currency of Politics: The Political Theory of Money from Aristotle to Keynes by Stefan Eich, 2022.
While local campaign watchers are agog at the sky-high expenses for the SJ D3 special election among some candidates, the Scholars Strategy Network outlines the many ways big money undermines true democracy, and filters out innovative, centrist candidates.
Money cannot always buy election results; weak candidates often lose even when they outspend their opponents. .Yet the perfectly legal flood of money that pervades American politics has fundamentally corrupting effects.
The effects of money are manifold, subtle, and hard to pin down, but a number of pathways of influence can be laid out. Political scientist Gary Jacobson and other scholars have pinned down how monetary advantages affect chances of winning.
The need for money tends to filter out centrist candidates. Most congressional districts are gerrymandered to ensure a big advantage for one party or the other, so that election outcomes are actually decided in low-salience, low-turnout, one-party primary elections. Primaries are usually dominated by ideological party activists and money givers, who tend to hold extreme views and to reject all but the purest partisan candidates.
The quest for money tilts candidates' priorities and policy stands. Countless hours spent grubbing for money from affluent contributors changes candidates' priorities and sense of constituent needs.
Affluent citizens get extra influence by turning out to vote, working in campaigns, and contacting officials. Campaign contributions are not the only way in which affluent people get involved in politics; these same people tend to be active in other ways too, underscoring their importance to candidates.
Money can tip the outcome of close elections. Money spent on media, organizing, and turnout tends to increase vote totals, giving a significant advantage to candidates favored by money givers.
The quest for re-election money affects officials' priorities and policy stands. From the moment they win office, candidates look ahead to the money they must raise for reelection, and this is bound to steal time from official duties and slant their attention toward constituents who are substantial donors.
In sum, the net effects of money in politics include distraction from the public business, exacerbation of polarization and gridlock, and distortion of policy making in wasteful, inefficient, and anti-democratic directions.
Read the whole thing here.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.