We are all
becoming aware of just how expensive it is to gain entrance to America's
political theater, most particularly if one has desires to control all of the
eggs in the basket. While it looks like the incumbent President could
well be on his way to a billion dollar campaign, it is not inexpensive to enter the
slightly lower levels of Washington. An interesting table of data published by the
Campaign Finance Institute gives us an idea of just how expensive it is to win
a seat in the House and Senate as shown on this screen capture:
The average
cost of winning a seat in the House rose by 101 percent from $715,401 in the
1986 election to $1,434,760 in 2010 when adjusted for inflation. The cost
to win a seat in the Senate rose by 47 percent from $6,103,099 in 1986 to
$8,993,945 in 2010, again, in inflation-adjusted dollars. Notice that the
cost of winning a Senate seat actually peaked at $9,556,624 in 2006, a rise of
57 percent over 20 years. As well, you'll notice the jump from $6.228
million in 1998 to $9.115 million in 2000; that year's data is skewed by the
spending of Jon Corzine of New Jersey who spent $63,209,506 and Hillary Clinton
who spent $29,941,194, respectively spending 1334 percent and 632 percent of
the average. Apparently, they really wanted to win!
In 2010, all
candidates for the House spent, in total, $929,421,775 in their
attempts to win the prize; this is up 15 percent from $808,001,712 just two
years earlier in non-inflation adjusted dollars. Over the decade, total
expenditures rose by 81 percent from $514,793,499 in 2000, again, in
non-inflation adjusted dollars. Looking all the way back to 1974, all
candidates for the House spent only $44,051,125 resulting in a mean expenditure
of only $56,539 for each candidate; a tiny 3.9 percent fraction of what was spent by House
candidates in 2010. Corrected for inflation over
the 36 year period, $56,539 would increase to only $250,073 showing that the
growth rate in expenditures by candidates far, far outstrips inflation.
All
candidates for the Senate spent, in total, $568,193,547 for the
privilege of potentially taking a seat in the Senate; this is up 46 percent
from $389,348,721 two years earlier in non-inflation adjusted dollars.
Over the decade, expenditures rose by 48 percent from $384,591,165 in
2000. Looking back to 1974, all candidates for the Senate spent a paltry
$28,436,308 resulting in a mean per candidate expenditure of only $555,714 or
6.2 percent of what was spent by Senate candidates in 2010. Once again,
correcting for inflation over the 36 year period, $555,714 would increase to
only $2,457,935, once again, showing that the growth rate in candidate
expenditures is nearly four times the rate of inflation.
Keeping in
mind that in 2011, according to the United States Census Bureau, mean household
income was $69,677, this data shows that the cost of
entry to the upper echelons of the American political scene is limited to a
tiny fraction of citizens that have the connections necessary to raise the
millions of dollars necessary to run a campaign that has a reasonable chance of
success.
No comments:
Post a Comment