The Corrupting Influence of Big Money on Politics

Money from corporations and PACs play a powerful and destructive role in modern politics.

In recent times, money has increasingly become the biggest factor in election results,OpenSecrets.Org reporting in the 2016 Presidential race, found that $1.4 billion had been spent by dark money groups and super PACs. With super PACs being able to spend unlimited amounts of money supporting or opposing political candidates, a situation has arisen were many politicians prioritise the interests of these powerful organisations over those of ordinary constituents.

But, it hasn’t always been this way. In 1971 the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) put limits on individual and PAC spending on political campaigns and a 1974 amendment created the FEC; which enforces and clarifies campaign finance law. Then, in 2002, the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act — AKA McCain-Feingold — sought to restrict the role of soft money in campaigns. (Soft money is largely unregulated donations to parties by individuals, PACs and other organisations)

However, attempts at campaign finance reform have long encountered judicial challenges; much of FECA was struck down by the Supreme Court’s ‘Buckley v. Valeo’ (1976) ruling — which said that candidate spending restrictions were against the 1st Amendment. Additionally, much of McCain-Feingold was struck down by the controversial 5–4, 2010 ‘Citizens United’ Supreme Court ruling. This opened the floodgates to unions and corporations being able to give candidates unlimited amounts of money and, the effect on politics as we know it today has been astronomical.

Today, money is undoubtedly one of the most powerful forces in American politics. In the 2018 Midterms, nearly 90% of House races and, over 80% of Senate races were won by the candidate who spent the most money and, as if this isn’t bad enough, big money overwhelmingly goes to incumbents; with defence sector PACs giving 96.7% of their dollars to incumbents in 2018 and, health sector PACs giving just 1.8% of their money to challengers in the same cycle. This helps explain why it’s so hard to get a new generation of fresh-thinking politicians elected and, shows the significance of the elections of people like Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) — who was outspent 18–1 in her primary challenge against an entrenched incumbent.

The effect of corporations and PACs undue influence in politics is evident in all the issues we care about.

When looking at the Environment and the current climate emergency — which I wrote about in detail in my previous article — it is clear that the fossil fuel industry has a firm grip on Washington. In 2018, the oil and gas industry spent over $125 million lobbying congress, with the vast majority of this money going to Republicans. Indeed, in this election cycle, of the top 20 recipients of money from energy/natural resources companies, 18 were republicans; with Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) topping the list. The only two Democrats on the list were Rep. Beto O’Rourke (D-TX) and, Sen. Heidi Heitkamp (D-ND), who both fought in competitive, high profile and, ultimately unsuccessful Senate bids.

However, most others on that list were successful in their respective election bids and, many representatives and senators — who are given large sums of money from fossil fuel industries, ‘repay’ the favour through supporting subsidies for the industries. Indeed as reported on by Priceofoil.org, in the 113th Congress, $41.8 billion was “given in federal production and exploration subsidies” to the industry, while the big fossil fuel companies spent $350 million in campaign contributions. As the website summarised, this was the equivalent of “$1 in, $119 out” or a “11900% return on political investment”.

Meanwhile, big pharmaceutical companies also have a deeply destructive impact on politics, spending more than any other industry trying to influence politicians and, giving money to 97% of senators. The consequence of this is having laws that allow these companies to charge $600 for EpiPen’s, which the British NHS pays just $70 for. The human price of the lack of regulations on big pharma is severe; even when factoring in inflation, the cost of insulin in the USA has increased 1000% since 1923. This can lead to the poorest Americans dying when they have to ration their insulin. Indeed, this is what happened with Alec Smith who died in 2017 after becoming too old to be covered by his mothers insurance plan. The BBC reported, “Despite working full-time making more than minimum wage, he could not afford to buy new insurance or pay the $1,000 a month for insulin without it”

Perhaps, the influence of big money is most well known in the gun industry, in particular the NRA (National Rifle Association), which gives massive sums of money to candidates who oppose gun control. This means that “common-sense” measures to reduce gun violence are routinely rejected by the NRA and, fail to become law. For instance, there has been great resistance to universal background checks, despite the fact that Quinnipiac polling found the idea to have 97% support — a higher level of support than any other measure ever polled by the company.

Despite all of this is, there are reasons to be hopeful; regarding gun control, the NRA’s finances have been hit by companies distancing themselves from the organisation in the wake of the Parkland shooting and, state legislatures have voted for ‘red flag’ legislation, which lets guns be removed temporarily from people who show warning signs of violence. Meanwhile, regarding the fossil fuel industry, 17 Democratic Presidential candidates have signed or are poised to sign a ‘No Fossil Fuel Money’ Pledge and, the conversation on healthcare has moved to the left — with a large number of Democratic Presidential candidates supporting Medicare-for-all and other proposals which would ensure universal healthcare.

88% of Americans want to reduce the influence of large campaign donors in politics, so if we want reform, what we have to do is make sure this becomes an issue people are informed about and prioritise when voting.

[Many of the statistics in this article comes from Opensecrets.org, a website which tracks campaign spending]