The pervasive influence of money in politics has become ingrained in the public’s perception of how the government works. We all have that jaded friend or relative who has become disillusioned because “they’re all corrupt, they’ll never change.” While most Americans aren’t quite as pessimistic, the perpetuation of a system wherein money is tantamount to political power leads to an exasperated, discontented citizenry. In the wake of the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision on Citizens United v. FEC, elections have become increasingly corrupted by unlimited campaign spending. Now, 78 percent of Americans say they want sweeping changes to mitigate the role of big money in politics.
Presidential candidates from both sides of the aisle have seemingly recognized this growing frustration. Donald Trump separated himself from the Republican primary field by criticizing his competitors’ reliance on big-money interests. During the first debate, Trump said, “Our system is broken. I gave to many people … When they call, I give. And do you know what? When I need something from them two years later, three years later, I call them, they are there for me.” The Democratic contenders also focused on campaign finance reform. Bernie Sanders showed that it was possible to run a campaign using small-dollar contributions, underscoring that the average donation to his campaign was only $27. Likewise, at her campaign launch in June, Hillary Clinton declared that she wants to “stop the endless flow of secret, unaccountable money that is distorting our elections.” Over the course of her campaign, Clinton has vowed to introduce a constitutional amendment to overturn Citizens United, enact legislation to increase transparency, and create a small donor matching system. Moreover, earlier this month, Clinton’s running mate Tim Kaine stated, “One of the first three pieces of legislation that she’s going to push in the first 100 days of her administration is to dramatically change the way campaigns are financed.”
Americans know all too well, though, that promises made during elections don’t necessarily translate to policy. Indeed, Trump has offered no specific plans for reform and has received tens of millions of dollars from Republican bigwig donors like Sheldon Adelson. Similarly, Clinton has relied on corporate donations and outside spending. So far, her Super PACs have received $143 million in contributions, of which $41 million came from the “Securities and Investment” sector alone. This gaping disconnect between rhetoric and reality has cast doubts on whether either candidate will enact meaningful reform. As Trump would put it, they might just be “all talk, no action.”
Our trust issues are not unwarranted. During his 2008 presidential campaign, Barack Obama also voiced support for getting big money out of politics, advocating for public-financing of Congressional campaigns and pledging to appoint FEC commissioners committed to reform. During his 2012 reelection campaign, President Obama even called for “mobilizing a constitutional amendment process” to overturn Citizens United. Nonetheless, he has had little success thus far. To be sure, much of the jurisdiction over campaign finance laws lies outside of the President’s purview, but it’s worth noting that like Clinton, Obama relied heavily on corporate donors, including Wall Street titans like Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan Chase, and Citigroup.
If we want our candidates to do more than make empty promises and tell us what we want to hear, then we as citizens need to do our part by participating in the democratic process. That means actively making our voices heard, voting with pride, and pushing our representatives to take action. Some citizens are doing just this, initiating momentum that we can build upon. Organizations like Move to Amend have pushed to get rid of “corporate personhood,” the precedent established by Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and reaffirmed by Citizens United that gives corporations the same free speech rights as individuals. Democracy Matters, a national student organization which the author is a part of, wrote the clauses on campaign finance reform that were incorporated into the Democratic Party’s platform this July. Another group fighting for campaign finance reform is the Patriotic Millionaires, a team of wealthy Americans who want to reduce the role of special interests in our political system. They recently founded a coalition, which includes Democracy Matters, that is pushing for the first presidential debate to include campaign finance reform as a discussion question. Recent polling indicates that “money in politics” is one of the six most important issues for voters this election; the debates should undoubtedly address this pivotal topic.
As Max Stahl, director of political engagement for Democracy Matters, noted, “Money in politics is not only intersectional with every great challenge we face as Americans—this election cycle it has become one of the most potent political issues.” Yet it’s not enough for campaign finance reform to only be an issue during election season. If Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump are truly committed to campaign finance reform, they will need to act on it while in office, and we will need to hold them accountable. We cannot allow corruption to become the norm; we cannot become apathetic. We have to educate ourselves and others. We have to vote—not just in the presidential election, but also in our congressional and local elections—for candidates who believe in democracy of the people, by the people, and for the people. We have to make sure our current representatives hear our voice. In short, we have to care.
Blu Frankel is a member of Harvard College Democracy Matters, a student group that examines the influence of money in politics.
Image Credits: Gage Skidmore/Flickr, neverbutterfly/Flickr