Funding for Political Parties (Civic Issues #3)

Hey everyone, welcome back to my blog. It’s been a while since my last civic issues post, so I’m going to take a minute to briefly recap what we’ve been discussing in the last two posts.

The overarching theme of my blog is politics. More specifically, the theme of my blog is political parties: Their origins, their purpose, etc. My first post talked about the origins of political parties in the United States, how they came to be, and the long and windy road that eventually led to the system of Democrats and Republicans we know today. Although these are the two main parties in our system, a huge foundation of our government is that there are free and fair elections, and that anyone is able to run for public office, regardless of their political party. My second post talked more about these smaller political parties and people without any affiliation with a political party. In my second blog post, it was very clear that most smaller parties have almost no chance of competing with the two main parties. One thing I failed to mention was the question I’m sure most of you would be thinking: “Well, why is that?” The main reason smaller parties are unable to compete is due to a lack of funding.

Besides the political support that a candidate receives from their party, a huge factor in their success is funding. Any candidate that is running on the ticket of any political party will receive funding from that party. At a basic level, funds are raised from individual donations by citizens affiliated with that party. This is called “grassroots fundraising”. In the age of the Internet, and even more recently with the growth of crowdfunding websites such as GoFundMe and Kickstarter, this is becoming a very popular method of fundraising. But, when a candidate is a Republican or a Democrat, it’s hard to beat the number of potential donors they have due to their party size. Take a look at this infographic showing the number of Democrats and Republicans in our country:

page1-777px-Party_Identification_(2011).pdf

As you can see, these two parties take up a vast majority of the voter base in terms of numbers. They have a greater access to a larger pool of voters, which means a larger pool of potential donations for them to receive. However, that doesn’t mean that there is no hope for any other party. A notable example of a successful donation campaign is Ron Paul. Although technically a Republican, he affiliated with the party minimally and the party gave him very little support. While Paul was in the Republican primaries in 2008 attempting to receive the Republican bid, he developed a massive grassroots following. Through various social media sites and campaigns, Paul received $4.2 million dollars in donations in just over 24 hours. This event became known as a “money bomb”, which you can read about more here: http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2007-12-17-ronpaul-fundraising_N.htm

Besides individual donations from supporters, another huge advantage that Republicans and Democrats have over other political parties is the supports of PACs. A PAC is a political action committee, and the purpose of a PAC is to pool donations specifically for the support of politicians or specific bills. At the US federal level, an organization is considered a PAC when it receives or donates more than $2,600 for the purpose of influencing a political election, according to the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (For more about the history and specifics of this act, check out http://www.fec.gov/info/appfour.htm).

PACs are very important and helpful to many political campaigns, but technically they don’t provide any significant increases in funding over other parties, mainly due to limits placed on their contributions by the Federal Election Commission, or FEC. This table shows the contribution limits that the FEC places on both individuals and PACs:

imrs

As the table shows, a PAC is limited to $15,000 donations if they support more than one candidate and $32,400 if they support one candidate. The FEC sets these limits to prevent massive organizations from exerting too much influence. However, in recent years a new type of PAC, known as a Super PAC, has been able to work around these limits.

Super PACs are a new type of political action committee that can raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, individuals and other associations, then spend unlimited amounts of money advocating for and supporting the campaigns of politicians. The reason they are allowed to raise these unlimited amounts of money is because unlike regular PACs, Super PACs are not allowed to work directly with any political candidates. The thing is, the word “directly” is a very vague term and creates a lot of legal gray area. Stephen Colbert addressed this issue a few years ago when he created his own Super PAC “Americans For A Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow” and announced his candidacy for “President of South Carolina”. Legally, since he was collaborating with a political candidate (himself), he was required to give up the ownership rights to his Super PAC. He handed it over to his colleague Jon Stewart, who aptly renamed it “The Definitely Not Coordinating With Stephen Colbert Super PAC”, and issued a statement to the public reading, “Stephen and I have in no way have worked out a series of morse-code blinks to convey information with each other on our respective shows.” This is a clip from Stephen’s show, The Colbert Report, where he jokingly interrogates his lawyer and former chairman of the FEC over different loopholes he can use to get around the system.

http://thecolbertreport.cc.com/videos/66y7dx/colbert-super-pac-shh—-secret-second-501c4—trevor-potter

Another large issue with Super PACs, along with the enormous funding that they provide, is the amount of influence they can exert on American politics. Since their inception, Super PACs have tended to consist of different interest groups. These groups focus all of their support on politicians that will keep their best interests in mind. This leaves politicians in a tough spot as they have to base their political views and decision making on what Super PACs want, for fear of losing funding they desperately need for their reelection campaigns. But, this is something I plan on talking about much more in depth in my next civic issues blog. Thanks for reading!

3 Comments on Funding for Political Parties (Civic Issues #3)

  1. Benjamin Madison France
    April 5, 2015 at 10:44 pm (9 years ago)

    As my blog is on politics, I am well aware of the funding that political candidates get for the campaigns, I think it is unfair of the amount of money contestant get because of what they stand for. Runners will get money from any company or corporation that they say they will endorse and keep running efficiently if they are elected. it is bribing for elections and yet they get away with it everyday and every election. I think there should be some reform on campaign funding.

  2. dja5294
    April 4, 2015 at 6:58 pm (9 years ago)

    I also think the funding of political parties has gotten so out of control that so many corporations can find so many loopholes to fund the political party of their choosing. Its ridiculous in my opinion. I am actually a big supporter of Dr. Ron Paul, and remember his grass roots campaigns and how much money they raised for his campaign. Yes he ran under the Republicans, because there’d be no other way for him to win. Independent campaigns will not win in America for the foreseeable future. I also remember Stephen Colbert’s Super Pac in 2012 in which he raised funds for his campaign as a Republican Candidate. Good times. Anyways, great read!

  3. Gabrielle Cilea
    April 3, 2015 at 11:57 am (9 years ago)

    I think that funding for political elections is one of the more unknown aspects of the election season. Most candidates are wealthy politicians and lawyers, so I figured they got their funding from rich friends and colleagues. Your article highlights funding as a more complicated and even politically driven process. It makes me upset to know that these politicians align themselves with whatever their funders want in order to keep their money. I appreciate reading your posts because they make me feel more politically literate and educated!

Leave a Reply